Studies on the Nature of Biblical Authority

By long tradition, the “Cut” that introduces each new issue of High Ground is supposed to be mildly satirical, self-deprecating and at least slightly humorous piece as a part of a nefarious scheme to entice the unwary into reading our more serious stuff. We would then pepper the entire newsletter with little “funny” bits; things we had either written ourselves (after late night marathon sessions watching “Adult Swim” on the Cartoon Network) or found on the Internet; “come for the jokes, stay for the theology.”

However, we have been moving away from that for the last couple of issues. First, quite frankly some people just do not have a sense of humor; as an old friend, known for his witty aphorisms once said, “Some Christians act like they were baptized in pickle juice.” We thought that we were just following Mary Poppins’ advice in using a little sugar to help the medicine go down. Granted, not being professional comedy writers, maybe we have not always been that funny; but some people seem to like their theology better when it’s bitter.

Secondly, we have undergone some serious trauma over the past couple of years and quite frankly, we have not done a lot of laughing ourselves. The details are not really important but it is hard to create jokes when the high point of waking up is thinking, “Well at least I am one day closer to the resurrection!” Elaine insisted that we need to look on the bright side; I no longer have to worry about retirement because the past five years have probably taken two decades off my life…

And thirdly, while making fun of the silliness that is so common in the American church might be lawful –at least it keeps us from crying or tearing our hair out in frustration - is it the best way? When we were really hurting, certain gracious people went out of their way to encourage, support and stand with us. This caused us to wonder if rather than adding a little “sugar” to the “medicine,” maybe all we were doing was rubbing “salt” into the wounds (gotta love those mixed metaphors)?

So, we are not promising NEVER to crack a joke or attempt a witticism and maybe something will slip through when we are not looking. But in the main, we want to focus on being a little kinder, a little gentler, and in encouraging others. We have tried to temper the language to encourage others to obey God, not just criticize their disobedience.

Church Ministry

Highlands Reformed Church moved its location to Idaho last year to accommodate the needs of many of our people, some of whom had to commute almost two hours for Sabbath services. We are now strategically located at:

The Silver Lake Motel

6160 N. Sunshine St,

Coeur D Alene, ID 83815

(I can never spell that city – something else we can blame on the French!). We have a wonderful congregation; small but with dedicated believers committed to bringing every thought captive to Christ. They are universally humble, loving, gracious, kind, supportive, and hungry for spiritual growth. This may be the smallest congregation I have ever served; but it is also the godliest.

We have added a few new households this year; some still having to commute from a considerable distance. Winter weather, childhood sickness and the like mean that for any given Sunday, we may have as much as half our congregation providentially hindered. With the rise in gasoline prices, it actually has put a significant burden on some families to come to church. Highlands would appreciate your prayers and continued support.

Internet and Writing Ministries

We are amazed at how effective our web-sites have been; literally we have thousands of hits every month, from all over the world. Some of our articles and essays are picked up by other ministries and reposted on their web-sites. Almost all the new folks who worship with us found us originally on the “Net.” Please keep this aspect of our ministry in prayer; answering email from those who want to grow in understanding and applying a consistent, Biblical worldview is a large part of our ministry. The “Net” allows us to minister, to encourage and even disciple brothers and sisters that we might never meet personally.

We have also worked on a number of “for print” publications this year. Peter Hammond asked me to contribute to a new book entitled “The War against God” and I wrote about a hundred pages for it. This is really going to be an important analysis of why we suffer the things that we must endure. In fact, Elaine said that I could not have written what I did, if we had not undergone the last five years of trauma. The book is at the printer’s right now; we will let you know when copies will be available.

Meanwhile, apparently you can now find “Character Assassins” on Amazon.com. If you have not bought a copy yet, please do; in fact buy a copy for your pastor and elders and every gossip in your church! There is some wonderful material in this book and the many positive reports we have received back from ministers have been most encouraging.

We have also completed an entire series of brochures that cover various aspects of the Christian life; e.g., Dealing with Fear, Anger, Loneliness, Depression, Liberty of Conscience, Sanctification, God’s Plan for Victory, Finances, Family, etc., that are available at a slight cost. We also plan to make them available right here and on the Highlands Reformed website under “Christian Helps.” Our idea is to make simple introductions to very complex subjects to “help” Christians better understand a consistent Biblical worldview and how it applies to their daily life.

These projects, plus several others I have not mentioned because they are still in the planning stages with others, as well as researching new materials for every edition of High Ground take up a lot of time. The church though has been most supportive and encouraging; it is such a blessing to pastor people who have a vision to minister to the world.

Teaching Opportunities

The West Coast Christian Worldview Conference is coming up sooner than you think. If you have teenage or college age kids yourself, or know of ones in your church, now is the time to start encouraging them to attend. This annual conference has become in many respects, the high point of my year; just seeing so many godly, dedicated young men and women, coming together to discover how to develop a consistent, Biblical worldview is a great encouragement. Please consider supporting this vital ministry. Visit them at http://wcwc.ws/site/.

This Edition

Much of this edition was originally written for the Chalcedon Foundation’s Monograph series over a decade ago. However, publishing schedules, organizational changes and new challenges pushed this project off to the side. I had intended to make this material a sub-set of a longer work entitled, “Restoring Christian Relationships” as it seemed that in both the church and the family, people were often frustrated and divided because they did not understand how God intends authority to operate. As I was putting these materials together, I found that I had written far more on the issue of “authority” than I had initially assumed which could give some people the idea that I was advocating some sort of “authoritarian” mindset.

The older I get, the more I find that I loath tyranny in any form, and in any sphere of human life. I hate tyranny in the State; but I also deplore it in the family and the church. As I read the Scriptures and meditate on how life is to be lived to the glory of God I see a wonderful sense of liberty permeating every page. I have this ideal of free men, living responsibly under God, willingly serving others for His glory as being the key to not only living life to its fullest; but also to recapturing our culture from humanism.

What you are about to read below as a defense of lawful authority must always be understood in context of what I have just said above. I hate tyranny; I love liberty- “For you were called to freedom, brethren only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love, serve one another… (Gal 5:13). I interpret this to mean that Christians must have maximum freedom under God’s Law.” Where God has spoken, we must obey; where He has granted liberty, we must not compel.

We must also keep in mind that liberty is not autonomy. Several years ago I came under public attack by a sincere brother who reacted to a common phrase I “borrowed” from the late R. J. Rushdoony; “the self-governed man.” He assumed that by encouraging self-government I was advocating some form of autonomy (“auto” = “self” + “nomos” = “law” or “self-law”). He could not have been more wrong; I reject autonomy with as much passion as I reject tyranny. The “self-governed man” is simply one who has internalized the law of God so that he does what is right, just because it IS right! He does not have to be forced to obey God, or His human authorities, through fear or manipulation. He loves God, and he loves His Law and wants to bring every thought, every word and every deed into submission to Christ.

Perhaps I am naïve but I really do believe that being “self-governed” ought to be the goal of every Christian. Jesus said, “If you love me, keep my commands.” I love Jesus, and that means that though I am a wretched sinner, my heart has been changed by His Holy Spirit and I want to obey Him in everything. And when I fall short of His glory, I want to repent as quickly as possible and be restored to Him. Hence, this edition deals with the importance of obeying Him by learning how to relate properly with His authorities in family, church and State; how to give them the honor and obedience they are lawfully due, without handing over my conscience to any institution. Finding that balance I think is central to having peace in the home, joy in the church and liberty in the State.

However, experience has also taught me that my views are not universally shared within the Christian community. There is a real danger of “fascism” rearing its ugly head in even the most orthodox of churches, and the godliest of families. While “fascism” technically refers to a political and economic system (associated with Mussolini and Hitler) in its common usage it can be defined as “unlawful dominion over others.” In effect, some people do not like the way that other people live their lives, use their time, spend their money, raise their kids, treat their wives, etc. Such “fascists” strive to gain control of churches, or manipulate relationships to impose their will on others. If people do not submit to their unlawful demands, they will falsely accuse elders, excommunicate the innocent, divide churches, destroy families and crush anyone who stands in their way. Their most common tools is gossip (either personal or the Internet); which is dealt with in a book I co-authored with Peter Hammond (“Character Assassins; Dealing with Ecclesiastical Tyrants and Terrorists”).

The Biblical method of dealing with such “fascists” is to “speak the truth in love” and simply refuse to give them dominion in our lives. When we “stimulate one another to love and good deeds” the contentious, the divisive and the schismatic are revealed for what they are. We then have duty to gently confront them, and if they do not repent, reject them (Titus 3:10). The godly will receive the truth of the word with humility and repentance; the wicked will continue on the path to self-destruction. Therefore, the following study is offered as an attempt to find the balance of Christian liberty within the bounds of God’s unchanging Moral Law.

God has called us to peace; peace in our homes, our churches and in so far as it depends on us, with all men (Rms 12:18). Learning when to submit and how to submit will grant us a great measure of that peace. Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft; something abominable and repulsive in God’s sight; and may God grant us all repentance for our past sins. Yet, let us also move on to the wonderful liberty we have in Christ; to discover how to live richly and fully in His will and in peace with one another.

Brian M. Abshire, January 08

Dealing with Authority

Rebellion as a “Natural” Act

From the very beginning we have had a problem with authority. God, as the creator and sustainer of Creation, governs Heaven and Earth according to the pleasure of His own will. He gave Adam one, and only one command; but Adam rebelled against God’s authority, wanting to determine for himself what was good and evil. He did not want to recognize God’s right to require his obedience and as a consequence brought sin and death into the world. Adam then passed this same tendency for rebellion to all his posterity.

In the thousands of years since Adam, untold damage has been done by rebelling against lawful authority, or ungodly submission to unlawful authority. We tend to swing between two ends of the pendulum; from anarchy (recognizing no lawful authority) to tyranny (exercising unlawful authority) depending upon the circumstances. Liberty is a rarity in human history, difficult to attain, and even more difficult to retain.

Ultimately and finally, of course, all rebellion will be put down; every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. But in the meantime, we endure much needless suffering because we do not understand the nature of authority, its corresponding responsibilities, its limits or how we are supposed to respond to it.

God thinks so highly of authority that He included it as one the basic requirements of His Moral Law. The fifth commandment, dealing with honoring fathers and mothers, has been understood by most commentators in church history to include more than just our physical parents but how we are to treat anyone that God puts in authority over us. And let there be no mistake, every human being, is under the authority of both God and some other human institution; including kings and emperors. Since the Council of Chalcedon, the Church has maintained that no earthly claim to ultimate authority is valid, for all are under God. The “Divine Right of Kings” met its end, both theologically and militarily in the English Civil War and the American War of Independence. It may have taken centuries to work out all the implications, but no one is above the Law; everyone must submit to someone.

The Definition of Authority

What then is authority? Briefly defined, authority is the right of someone or some institution to require our obedience in some way. All authority is derived from the Lord God who created all things to reflect His nature, being and glory. In the doctrine of the ontological and economic trinity God reveals that each person of the godhead shares equality in being, nature, glory, honor and power. Yet each person of the trinity is distinct, (the economic trinity) with a distinct function and purpose. For example, the Father plans redemption, the Son obeys and accomplishes redemption (Jn 17:4) while the Spirit applies redemption to the human heart. Each Person is fully God, but each Person also has a different function. Furthermore, the Son submits to the Father, and the Spirit submits to both the Father and the Son. Thus, we have both equality of being and a positional difference between the members of the Godhead.

This concept is clearly seen by the words God used to talk about authority and submission. Our word “submit” most commonly translates the Greek hupotasso which means “to be placed under.” Just as there is a distinction between the Father and the Son, there is a positional difference between people; God places children under parents, citizens under civil magistrates, Christians under their elders, etc. This does not mean that by being in a subordinate position that they are second class persons. Rather it is an earthly illustration of a heavenly reality.

Thus, submission does not imply inferiority, just that there are differences between us. Being given lawful authority over another does not make you better than them. Nor may those given authority “lord it over” those placed under them (e.g., 1 Peter 5:1-3). Jesus, using Himself as the supreme example and model said, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and become a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). Clearly, those IN positions of authority have a divine responsibility to carry out their duties conscientiously, diligently and sensitively for the wellbeing of those under their authority. My good friend Dave Ames paraphrases this principle as “Authority is always for the benefit of those UNDER authority, never for the benefit of those IN authority (Rms 13:3-4, Eph 5:22ff).” This is an important truth. God chose to govern His creation by placing some people in positions of authority to act as His ministers (servants) for the benefit of His people. Thus a Biblical understanding of authority requires respect and honor for those providentially placed “higher” than us, and a diligent care and concern for those placed “under” us.

The Implications of “Submission”

Since all lawful authority is derived from the Lord God, submission is not mindless obedience but rather trust that God governs His creation in certain ways and that He has providentially placed people in life, where He wants them to be for His own purposes. God works through means. God could have chosen to govern His creation directly, speaking individually to each person with an audible voice; “Go here, do this…” However, He did not; instead He created institutions, the family, the church and the State as “ministers” or “servants” and gave them responsibility to act in His name. In a perfect world, without sin, holy men would have found the perfect balance between exercising their lawful authority while recognizing, respecting and protecting individual liberty.

However, since sin has entered the world, every aspect of creation has been touched by its corruption leading to two common errors when discussing authority and submission. On the one hand, there are some who recognize the real dangers of tyranny, but end up promoting autonomy and anarchy. On the other hand, there are those who recognize lawful authority but can err in demanding absolute obedience to those authorities.

Since all authority derives from God Himself, we cannot break His law by claiming we were only doing what an authority told us to do. There has always been a tendency for men especially to abdicate responsibility. Adam’s first act when confronted with his sin was to try and shift the blame back to his wife, and then to God. In Hebrew culture, a slave was often a man who traded his freedom for security; and throughout history, many men have given their conscience over to a king, priest, dictator, pope, pastor, etc. But the godly man walks the balance, recognizing the reality of human authority and submitting to it while at the same also recognizing his primary loyalty belongs to God.

Since submission is the willingness to recognize the right of another to require your respect and obedience in the areas God has entrusted to them, it requires more than just paying only “lip service” to one’s authority. Our highest calling is to glorify God in whatever situation He has placed us is. Therefore, if He has placed us under some authority, He expects us to bring all our talents, gifts, insights, and abilities to bear to make that institution a success.

For example, if we are employed by someone, that person has genuine authority over us at work. Our goal as Christians ought to be to make our company a success by working diligently and conscientiously. “Slaves be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh with fear and trembling in the sincerity of your heart as to Christ; not by way of eye service as men-pleasers but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good will render service as to the Lord and not to men knowing that whatever good thing each one does this he will receive back from the Lord whether slave or free…” (Eph 6:5-9) While the context of this passage deals with slavery, surely we would all agree that the underlying principle of how to submit to an authority would apply to many other areas of life. When we contract with an employer, we make a covenant; we will work for him a certain number of hours for an agreed on amount of pay. Our moral duties here are covered under the fifth, eighth and ninth commandments; we honor their lawful authority, we do not steal from them by taking their money without giving back what we agreed to give (our labor) and we keep our word.

Submission does not make us not mindless drones to be used and abused by upper management, but rather free men, who trust that God works through His appointed means. The godly man understands that God has given him certain gifts, talents and abilities, mixed them with various life experiences and has placed him in his current situation. Knowing that all lawful work is worship, he therefore, does his job, and does it well as he can for the glory of God. Even when companies are less than appreciative, or managers less than fair and equitable, we can still with a clear conscience give a good day’s work, knowing that we are offering that work to our God. And as we make our human authority a success, we not only adorn the gospel with good works, but make ourselves a success as well; God promises specifically to bless us.

Let us take a step back for a moment and consider the nature of life itself. Only God is independent; all men are limited in time, talents and abilities. Not all men have equal intelligence, equal talents or equal opportunities in life. No everyone is gifted in the same way or can do the same things. Yet there are many tasks in life that require men to work together for the common good.

Say for example a village sits on one side of a river. As the village grows, they start running out of arable ground to grow crops. On the other side of the river however there is plenty of fresh soil, just waiting to be tilled. However, the river is in the way. For the village to settle the far bank, a bridge must be built. But building a bridge takes a lot of time, specialized knowledge and the expenditure of considerable resources. No single man can build the bridge by himself; he needs the help of others. Even if one man knew how to build a bridge, he still needs someone else to help him cut down trees, saw them into planks, drag them to the site, and assemble them into a bridge. The bridge requires labor, capital and knowledge.

Now we all highly value multi-talented people who can do many different things; but even a man who was wealthy, strong and technically savvy could not build this bridge on his own. He needs the help of others. People need to work together to accomplish something that would benefit everyone. And someone has to be in charge, to coordinate the efforts, to acquire the needed resources, to plan and schedule the work. An old adage is that “something that is everyone’s responsibility is no one’s responsibility.” Some form of authority is necessary to complete the task.

The same principle affects every area of life. Most men would enjoy working for themselves without having a boss to tell them when to show up for work, what to do while at work, etc. But why do most men have to work for someone else? Why do the vast majority of new businesses fail? The simple answer is that most of us lack the abilities needed to create and run a business. We do not know how to read the market, organize our time, plan and schedule work, deal with the employee problems, etc. None of these are moral failings - just the inevitable result of God’s providence in that He has not gifted every man with the same talents and opportunities. Therefore, most of us end up working for others (and an argument could be made that even business owners “work” for their customers).

Now we did not intend here to get side-tracked onto a discussion of economics but in building a bridge, running a business, maintaining a home, organizing a church or governing a State, someone has to be in charge, to resolve problems, adjudicate disputes, coordinate efforts, and ensure that the goal is never lost. This is inevitable because we are not God; we are dependant, we need others. And since God Himself has positional authority as a part of His own unchanging nature, we in creation will reflect that diversity.

Sinful men however resist lawful authority and will often do only the bare minimum required to get by. They want to do their will rather than follow the instructions of those placed over them. The free market system uses enticements and rewards to motivate their workers. However, historically, other tactics have been used. All authority has certain sanctions it can bring to enforce its will, if nothing else works, men learn to fear the sanctions and therefore give grudging obedience; e.g., every one drives slower when they see a police car. Yet true Biblical submission must go one step further. Since it is God we are serving when we obey lawful authority, and He has organized human affairs to reflect His own nature, we must do more than just seek rewards or avoid sanctions. Take for example a child whose father tells him to clean his room. If he does not comply with Dad’s lawful instruction, he can suffer “sanctions.” Dad may rebuke him, which no one likes. Dad might make him stay on that job until it is done to his satisfaction, not allowing him to play outside. Or, Dad could even spank him.

The child then is forced to obey because he fears the consequences of rebelling. Since we are all sinners, all of us at times may have the same sinful temptation to rebel, and God gives various spheres of authority the right to punish us in some way; remember, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” Parents can spank their children, churches can discipline their members and the State has the “power of the sword” to suppress wickedness.

However, surely we recognize that obedience out of fear may be the beginning of wisdom, but not its end. The father who relies solely on sanctions to enforce his lawful authority risks “vexing” his children. The boss who constantly threatens his workers with being fired is going to lose his best people as they seek a better working environment. States that tyrannize their citizens will ultimately fall to revolutions. The Christian should not submit to lawful authority out of fear, but in confidence that God is in control – but the authority, if it is wise, will make that submission as easy as possible by demonstrating that they have their peoples’ best interests in mind.

If we appreciate that by submitting whole-heartedly to lawful authority we are simply obeying God, and then bring all our gifts, insights and abilities to accomplish the goals of the institution, everyone involved is blessed. The authority does not have to become strict and harsh and those in submission can find peace and prosperity. For example, when told to clean his room, a godly child will do precisely what is needed to fulfill his father’s instruction without grumbling or complaining. Granted, with children, a large part of the problem is that they need to be taught HOW to do a certain task. This is where the father needs to be patient and understanding giving the child time and opportunity to learn how to accomplish the task successfully. Some children will learn faster than others; some seem to need to be told the same thing over and over again until even the godliest of parents’ feel like tearing their hair out in frustration! But the point here is that as a child matures into an adult, hopefully they will learn that rather than do a half-fast job just to get Mom and Dad off his back, he embraces his parent’s goals. As a result, not only does he save himself much grief and pain, he actually develops vital skills that are essential to prosperity and productivity throughout his life.

Often the difference between the man who is successful in life from some one who just “gets by” is the ability to “go the extra mile.” In our earlier illustration, the village needed a bridge to take advantage of the great fields across the river. If the workers refuse to show up on time, if they spend the work day gossiping and sleeping, if they do their work sloppily, then the bridge will not be built; and the fields will not be planted. If they want the benefits of the bridge, they must get behind the project with all their heart; the sooner the bridge is built, the sooner they can enjoy the benefits of the fields. The better they build the bridge, the longer it will last; thus saving them from having to do it all over again in a few years time. When we give whole hearted submission to the goal of an authority, everyone benefits; if we only do the bare minimum, everyone suffers. Furthermore, if everyone else is working hard and we are loafing, people will recognize that and not entrust us with greater responsibilities or opportunities. It is a basic principle of our Lord that we must prove ourselves faithful in little things before He will give us “greater” things.

Granted there are unreasonable people in every sphere of life who will never be pleased with anything that any one ever does for them. Some men in positions of authority can be capricious, arbitrary, unfair, harsh and tyrannical. As a direct consequence, the entire project suffers; people will not work as well for a dictator as they will for a capable but compassionate leader; free men in the West have constantly out produced slave economies such as Fascism or Marxism. If we are forced to deal with such people, let us simply praise God for His providence and look for the time when we no longer have to deal with them. If we cannot lawfully remove themselves from their authority, let us still trust in the providence of God and do what is right. R. J. Rushdoony has noted that Imperial Rome eventually they had to stop persecuting the church, because Christians were the most productive, law abiding citizens; and the only ones who paid their taxes! Even though pagan Roman emperors hated us, they needed us.

Usually however, when an authority is upset with us we need to take a long, hard look at our own motivations. Often, we are more concerned about our own promotions, our own pride or own goals. We all want to do, what WE want to do; and many of us give only grudging submission to those placed above us. Authority in any sphere of life will recognize this attitude and act accordingly; we are the ones that pay the price.

Personal anecdote; years ago when the world was young and dinosaurs still walked the earth I spent almost six years serving the US government in the Air Force. Being rather typical of my generation, I resented all authority. And though forced by financial circumstances to do a stint in the military, I was not about to anything more than what was actually demanded of me. In this I was not alone; in those days, almost everyone serving their first “hitch” did so only grudgingly and under compulsion. One of the manifestations of that rebellion was in dress and appearance. It was an unstated goal of almost every one of my peers to see how far they could push the official standards. To have your hair cut, shoes shined and a pressed uniform was considered being a “lifer” and universally ridiculed. I spent the first two years of my enlistment pushing those standards just as far as I could; I never did any of them unless specifically ordered to do so. In other words, I was waiting until being threatened with sanctions before submitting.

Some time along that process I became a Christian and by the love and grace of God met some wonderful older brothers who shared with me, much of the information I am writing about here. While in the course of Bible studies and discussions the subject of authority and submission came up, slowly it finally began to sink in that by rebelling against lawful human authorities, I was in fact rebelling against God. I repented of that rebellion and started trying to see every task as a way of glorifying God- no matter how mundane. Now, just to put things in perspective, I had a job that I absolutely hated in the Air Force; one that I found boring, demeaning and unchallenging. Yet, if God was in control, that meant He wanted me right where I was, doing what I was doing. Rather than straining against His providential care, I needed to repent and get behind it.

And all that was required was simply to show up for work a few minutes early each day (instead of trying to walk in the door exactly on-time, which meant that if anything went wrong I would be late). Glorifying God in my situation meant getting a hair cut BEFORE my sergeants told me to; shining my shoes every day and making sure my uniform was cleaned and pressed. What I did not realize was that by making these somewhat mundane applications would be instrumental in changing my entire attitude towards every area of my duties. Rather than waiting to be told to do certain things, I took the initiative and started looking around for jobs that needed to be done. Rather than just doing the minimum to “get by” I began to actively look for ways to do my job better, faster and more efficiently, taking on extra projects and even staying as late as needed to complete the day’s work. Within a few months I went from being just another “problem child” to being seen as being a dependable, reliable and trustworthy worker that was an asset to the organization.

In all this, I was not trying to advance myself, just be faithful in the situation God had placed me. But in His grace, because there was such a profound change in my attitude and work, every single person in my shop asked me “what happened to you?” And I had the opportunity to share Christ with each and every one of them! Several even prayed with me to acknowledge Jesus as Lord; but the important thing was that God was glorified in my submission.

And while I did not expect it, I received better and better performance reports that directly led me to being promoted above my peers. I literally went from being one of the lowest ranking people in the shop to the one in charge, just by trying to obey God in submitting to His human authority.

Thus, authority is something to be desired rather than despised. Men must work together to create great things or accomplish great tasks; but to work together, demands that we have some sort of system in place to organize our efforts. “Too many chiefs, too few Indians” is an old and time honored cliché. The reason why it became a cliché is because it is something universal in human experience. When men work together and are willing to subordinate their individual desires to accomplish a greater good, incredible things can be accomplished. But if men are only concerned about having their own way, advancing their own agenda or doing their own will, then nothing good ever happens.

Submission to lawful authority gives us freedom to act within set bounds. Once we know the limits, we have freedom to act within those limits. Is a train free to travel without tracks? Granted, the tracks restrict the direction of the train, but the train cannot function outside of set boundaries. In the same way, God never intended for free men to live without any limits. The authority He grants to various institutions defines those limits and true freedom comes from acknowledging and living within them.

Let us go back again to our bridge illustration; everyone wants the bridge and the benefits that will come. Everyone is willing to work on the bridge; but who does what? Who cuts down the trees, who saws them into planks, who attaches them together? Someone has to organize the labor and ensure that the right men have the right supplies when they need them. The carpenters are only free to work their craft if the lumberjacks do their job; what if the lumberjacks decide that hammering nails is more “glamorous” than cutting trees? Every group associated with building the bridge needs to limit their own freedom in some way, so that they can work at their best. And the guy in charge, the “authority” is the one who brings them all together.

Who Has Authority?

First, civil governments have the right to make certain laws and expect their citizens to obey them (Rms 13:1 ff). Specifically, God says that the civil magistrate is His minister for justice, with the right to punish certain classes of criminal behavior. The magistrate also has the authority to require us to pay taxes and the right to demand our honor and respect. Now granted, in a Biblical Republic, the powers of the magistrate will be far less than in any modern society and the taxes considerably less. There is no doubt that all modern governments have greatly exceeded their God given roles and become tyrannies. But please notice that in ALL the times the magistrate is discussed in the Scriptures, even when they are acting contrary to Biblical Law, Christians are still commanded to respect and submit to their authority. The only exception is when the magistrate attempted to force Christians to sin. The early church was persecuted and murdered because they refused to offer a pinch of incense to the Emperor. They were NOT persecuted because they refused to pay their taxes (taxes which were unlawful according to Scripture), they were NOT persecuted because they denounced Caesar in the public forums, and they were NOT persecuted because they formed paramilitary organizations and attacked Roman garrisons. Social transformation came to the Roman Empire by reformation, not revolution.

Volumes could be written specifically to detail the duties and responsibilities of the State and how Christians should deal with tyranny; Samuel Rutherford gave a definitive response in “Lex Rex.” Therefore here we will only note that autonomy and anarchy are contrary to Biblical Law.

God also gives genuine authority to parents over their children (Eph 6:1). They have the right and responsibility to educate their children (both formally and informally), training them up under God’s Law (Eph 6:3ff). Children are required to respect and honor (Eph 6:2) as well as obey (Col 3:20-21) their parents. In fact, Paul makes it clear that this is the first commandment with a promise, obey and honor your parents so that your life might be long on the earth. God specifically promises to bless children with a long and productive life if they “honor” their parents; not just “good” parents, or fair ones or just ones, but all parents. While fathers are required not to “vex” or exasperate their children (i.e., to make that submission as easy as possible), this does not negate their genuine right to compel a child’s obedience.

Husbands are given authority over their wives (Eph 5:12, Col 3:18). A husband has the right and responsibility to require that his wife respect him (Eph 5:33), that she not nag him (1 Ptr 3:1ff ) and she obey him in his lawful role as head of the household. It is significant that in many modern marriage ceremonies, this duty to obey one’s husband is left out (in fact, after refusing to withdraw this vow, several people who asked me to perform their weddings then decided to find another pastor). Yet it is crucial to a wholesome, Biblical marriage. Some liberal evangelicals have insisted that modern marriage requires “mutual” submission, a nonsense term. Since the word “submit” means “to be placed under,” two people cannot “submit” to another, any more than two plates can be stacked so that neither is on top of the other! Granted, the husband is required to treat his wife with gentleness, kindness, and not abuse her trust. But he still has genuine authority within the marriage relationship (1 Tim 2:11f). He is the one responsible for ensuring that the family stays on its Biblical course. He has the primary duty of teaching the entire family, including His wife, God’s Law (cf. Deut 6:6ff, 1 Cor 14:35). However, notice 1 Corinthians 7:4, the wife also has genuine authority over her husband’s body! When two people become one flesh, the wife must seek to please the husband, but the husband also has a duty and responsibility to please his wife!

Clearly, since husband and wife are “one flesh” they ought to be agreed on goals, means and how to best use the family’s resources and assets. They are a team and ideally, a godly husband with a godly wife will work together for the common good of the family. Going back again to our bridge illustration; the husband might be considered the architect and the wife the chief carpenter. His responsibility is to plan for the bridge and she assists him in that task. As a good “boss” of course he will consult her on the best way to build the bridge; he needs her skill and expertise to build a proper bridge. Furthermore, he might well develop plans that are impossible to execute with the resources possible; it is her duty to tell him that and work with him to build the best possible bridge they can. But ultimately, he is responsible to God for the bridge that is built.

The church has real authority over the congregation in terms of preaching the word and administering the sacrament. Elders are to be respected (Hebs 13:17, 1 Thess 5:12, 1 Ptr 5:1-4) and when speaking the truth, to be obeyed (Hebs 13:17). When a pastor steps in front of the congregation and preaches the Word, he is doing so with genuine authority, authority that is to be respected, even when we disagree with what he is saying. Even the Apostle Paul, when struck by a member of the Sanhedrin, APOLOGIZED for rebuking the High Priest. From our perspective, the High Priest DESERVED to be rebuked for his unlawful actions; yet Paul respected the position that God had placed the high priest in. Does this mean one may never disagree with one’s elders? No, of course not. All elders are human, which by definition means they too are sinners who fall short of the glory of God. They will sin, and like all other men, need to be rebuked and corrected. But that rebuke must come from a respectful man, in submission to God, in fear and trepidation, in a respectful manner.

This is I think a symptom of our time. We live in an egalitarian age and do not like to acknowledge the authority of others over us. We are in the inheritors today of the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960’s where lawful authority in every sphere of life was challenged and overthrown. As a result we have forty years of autonomy assumed as a basic social norm; many children have grown up in homes where little or no authority was exercised. This hatred of authority and quest for egalitarianism has had many profound effects on how we treat one another; e.g., we casually call our elders by their first names. Now, in and of itself, this is perhaps no big deal; but in doing so, we are in effect demanding to be put on the same level. And if we are on the same level, therefore we feel free to argue with them, debate them, criticize them, etc. Heaven forbid that we should actually consider the possibility that God has placed people over us to instruct us!

Granted, in today’s world, pastors often encourage such familiarity, are afraid of exercising authority and then wonder why their people never seem to learn. Though over the years, I have seen a few men I would consider to be ecclesiastical tyrants, I have also seen far more tyrannical parishioners who refuse to submit to ANY elder for ANY reason. They demonstrate it by their words, their attitudes and their willingness to rip a church apart with schism any time they disagree with the elders!

Now granted, a strong church, with strong men often means that there can be a conflict of wills. No godly session objects to having men who take the sermons seriously, study the Scriptures and ask hard questions. To the contrary, good pastors positively REJOICE when they have such men in their congregation. But we are not talking about Bereans here, but about ecclesiastical anarchists. It has been my experience over the past three decades that a pastor will be popular, highly respected and everyone’s favorite right up until he tells someone, something that the person would rather not hear. It might be a doctrine with which a church member is unfamiliar, it might be an ethical exhortation from Scripture that goes against the common practice; but all that a pastor has to do to go from “hero” to “bum” is to gently, kindly, and articulately correct someone.

In the same way, older men have some degree of authority over younger men (1 Ptr 5:5). Scripture requires young people to rise up when older people enter a room in respect to their age and experience. Now whether God intended this law as a passing cultural custom or an enduring sign of respect is something we do not have time to debate here. The underlying principle though ought to be clear; younger men must speak of and to older men with respect, granting them honor. Young men must not sharply rebuke older men, but rather appeal to them in love as to a father (1 Tim 5:1ff).

Older women have genuine authority over younger women (Titus 2:3-4); specifically, to teach them how to love their husbands and children, to be workers at home, etc. Younger women therefore have a duty to listen to the counsel of older women and learn from them. Wisdom is more than academic knowledge; it takes life experience to really appreciate how certain principles of God’s Word are to be worked out in practical applications. Sadly, our culture underwent a transformation in the 1960’s that lost much of the previous generation’s wisdom. We ridiculed our parents and grandparents for their values, habits and priorities, thinking we knew better. We ended up creating a culture where divorces happen as often as marriages, where women proudly bore children out of wedlock, where Mom decided that working out of the home was more “fulfilling” than raising a family. We are suffering the consequences today in poverty, crime, drug use, and emotionally scarred people of both sexes.

Finally, employers have genuine authority over their employees (1 Ptr 2:18, Eph 6:5-8). In the New Testament, slaves are commanded to work hard, respect their masters and obey them, not grudgingly but with a whole heart. In modern terms, we have eliminated slavery, but the principles still seem relevant and applicable. When we covenant to work for someone, we implicitly agree to accept their authority over us. We agree to work a number of hours for an amount of money. We agree to show up at work at certain times. We agree to abide by the policies the employer sets. And since all work is to be done as “to the Lord” we therefore have a responsibility to give them our best efforts. Unlike slavery, employers’ authority over us ends when the work day is over; but during that time, they have the right to compel our obedience in the areas with which we made covenant with them.

Limitations of Authority

In all the above situations, certain people are granted genuine authority by God in certain specific areas; and in those areas, they have the right to expect us to obey them. However, as mentioned before, no human institution can claim total authority over our lives because our ultimate loyalty must be given to God and God alone. Clearly, the first limitation is that no human authority can compel us to sin. In the past I would have assumed that this principle is self-evident yet over the years I have run across some people who deny this. Rather than take a long detour to explore this in detail, let us just quote Peter; “For we must obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29). Peter had been instructed by the Council of Elders to stop speaking about Jesus. They were a genuine authority in Israel at the time. Peter refused to obey this unlawful order. Therefore he articulated a basic Biblical principle of a limitation of human authority. Granted, wicked men can attempt to pervert this doctrine to justify rebellion but all we want to establish here is that there are times when men not only may, but MUST refuse to submit to human authorities.

Yet there are other limits to authority as well. God defines those limits within the framework of the authority structure. For example, parents have authority over their children until that child grows up and establishes a new household (Gen 2:26). Once a man has taken a wife and created a new covenant household, the authority of the parents ends. Granted, the son should still honor his parents, and listen respectfully to their counsel and advice, but he is no longer bound to obey them. But while he is living in their house, he is subject to their rules. He comes and goes as his parents dictate. He wears what his parents allow him to wear. He uses his time and money in the way his parents instruct him. Granted, a wise and prudent parent will work to make their children responsible, self reliant and productive people granting them increasing freedom as they mature. But when in his father’s house, a godly son lives by his father’s rules.

Again, no father wants to “vex” his children; the rules that he establishes for his household ought to be for the benefit of those under his care. A good father explains his reasons for his rules and will wisely allow for some negotiation in some areas. For example, parents might well set a regular bed time for the children. As the children grow older, they might let up on the restrictions to allow a child a later bed-time. The point here is that the parents have the right to set the standards and the child ought to obey.

In the same way, a godly wife submits to her husband and follows his leadership. He does not control her conscience, but when she takes that marriage vow, she promises to obey him. Again, granted, a godly husband will not be a tyrant, he will not run his household as if it were a petty kingdom and he the lord of all he surveys, making arbitrary rules just to watch his wife and children jump at his every command. He will demonstrate his leadership through his servant’s heart, giving himself up for his wife, working to create in her a godly and Christ-like character (Eph 5:19ff). He will not vex his children, but strive to bring them up in the fear and admonition of the Lord. But in this sphere, he does exercise genuine authority that must be obeyed. As mentioned, his primary responsibility is to set the standards for the household and keep it on track to glorify God. Since the authority as a husband was entrusted to him for the benefit of his wife, he must be careful to treat her with gentleness, kindness, compassion and love. Her duty before God to obey her husband does not make her his servant; his duty before God to work for her sanctification does make him hers!

A godly civil magistrate will protect the people under his care by aggressively seeking out criminals and applying Biblical sanctions against them (Rms 12:1ff). He will not become tyrannical and steal from some to buy the votes of others. He will keep the conditions of the covenant under which he was elected or appointed, not twisting the meaning to fit his own agenda. He will not attempt to use his power to tyrannize other legitimate institutions.

A godly church will focus on preaching the Word and administering the sacraments, applying discipline as needed against unrepentant sin but it will NOT seek to run every member’s life. It will recognize the appropriate authority of the State and the Family and work to bring both into godly submission to Biblical Law. The church does not have the authority to tell people who they should marry, how the family must spend its money or even how to raise their children, unless, there is a violation of the Moral Law.

Finally, the Family will not attempt to run the church. The Church and State will not seek to subvert the Family. Each sphere of lawful authority will recognize the legitimacy of the other spheres and seek to build up the godly social order by allowing the maximum degree of freedom.

When Authority is Wrong- the Right of Appeal

As mentioned, there is a problem; some men love the “thrill” of having dominion over others and lose sight of their divine duties. They can either abuse or misuse their authority and as a result, those under them may suffer. Bad men make bad decisions. An irresponsible husband may blow his paycheck in bars or on lottery tickets, a father can be unfair, the civil magistrate may waste our tax money, and a session may not care for the sheep. And though it is tempting to rebel against such misuses of authority, rebellion is never an option. The entire book of First Peter is written about submitting to a hostile authority, recognizing that sinful men will attempt to tyrannize us. Sometimes, submission cost us something. Scripture says that “this finds favor with God, when we bear up under sorrows when suffering unjustly” (1 Ptr 2:19). There is sometimes no earthly court of appeals and restitution must wait until the final state. However, we need to remember that God is in control and if we are humble before Him, the fires of this life will prepare us for future glory (1 Ptr 5:5-6).

Hence, just because an authority does something wrong, does not in and of itself mean that we are justified in removing or rebelling against it. While we will discuss options to unjust authorities later on, we need to understand that someone else’s sin does not justify or excuse ours. If a boss is unfair, a husband uncharitable, a parent arbitrary or a session unjust in their adjudication, we may have to suffer some indignity, some inconvenience and humiliation. I would suggest however that even here, God’s providence must be seen; perhaps the Lord is giving us the opportunity to practice submission, to go the “extra mile” to test whether we really trust in His sovereignty in the world?

It is not really submission to authority if you agree with what that authority is telling you. The acid test of submission is when you think that the authority is wrong. Do you do what you are told to do, with a glad heart and confidence in God even when you disagree? Yet we have already dismissed the idea that submission means mindless obedience. The problem is that all humans (and the institutions they create) tend to seek unlawful dominion over others by unlawful means. Because of Total Depravity, what was intended to be a source of peace and security often degenerates into tyranny and despotism. Therefore, Christians must face the real world problem of how does one deal with an authority that is either overstepping its limits, or telling us to do something that that we think ought not to be done?

First, let us recognize that fallen man is quite good at rationalizing, justifying or excusing rebellion and every Christian must be honest with God and himself when he thinks an authority errs. Are they wrong, or do you just disagree? Over the years I have met many Christians who want to complain about an authority in their life; their elders, their boss at work, their parents, husbands, etc. In many of the cases, honestly speaking, I might have even agreed with the complaint; if I had been in their place, I too might have concluded that the authority in question had erred. But just because we disagree with someone does not make them wrong or us right; life is a little more complicated than that. Life is messy, issues are often complex and sometimes, there can be legitimate differences in how we think a situation ought to be resolved.

However, because of our own sinful nature, we also need to realize that we can always find reasons why we ought not to obey someone with whom we disagree and therefore, give them a break. We do not always have the same information as those in authority. We do not have the same pressures. We do not have the same personality or life experiences. Just because they see an issue differently than we do does not make their decisions invalid or wrong. A leader who tries to lead his people into sin is one thing; simply because he wants us to do something that we do not want to do is a whole different issue. Maybe we are right, and the “boss” is wrong; or maybe he knows something we do not. In the end, sometimes only God can really sort out who was right and who was wrong. We will not be judged by God for the bad decisions of those He providentially placed over us; but we will be judged by how we dealt with those decisions. Therefore, unless something is a life or death situation, we need to remember that some decisions are just not our responsibility and “chill out.” God is still in control.

Secondly, let us also acknowledge that all perfection will have to wait for the resurrection. The fact that a father, husband, elder, or civil magistrate may and will err does not necessarily mean that they lose their lawful authority or give us the right to overthrow them. Good people sometimes make bad decisions; they may even do something wrong. Submission requires us to help them make the best possible decisions they can and if they blow it, not criticize or judge them. Let us all have a little self-honesty here; we will not always do the right thing for those placed under our care; therefore, we ought to give grace to those placed over us.

Since we all have a tendency justify rebellion, we must establish a basic principle to give authorities the “benefit of the doubt.” There are many gray areas in life where a situation might be one way, or the other, depending upon one’s point of view. A godly submission to authority will therefore allow the authority some room to make different or unpopular decisions without us second guessing them. Hence, workers will not complain about their bosses when a judgment call has to be made. Wives won’t nag their husbands (1 Ptr 3:1ff). Children will not whine about their parents’ reasons why they can’t do whatever it is they want to do. Church members won’t have roast pastor for Sunday lunch.

Thirdly, we always have the right to appeal what we perceive to be a bad judgment call on the part of authority. An appeal is simply asking the authority to reconsider his decision. Hopefully, a wise leader will consult with those under his care as a part of the information gathering process needed to make any decision. Since a godly leader is not a tyrant, but a servant of those under him, normally speaking, he should ask their input. When it comes to marriage, only a fool would make a decision without discussing an issue in great detail with his wife; the two are “one flesh” and she was created to be his “help-meet.” If he does not honestly and sincerely seek her wisdom and advice, he is cutting himself off from half of the resources God has given him! Lawful authority means having the responsibility before God for the final decisions that have to be made for a particular area of life; however, every decision requires good information if they are to be wise ones.

Sometimes though, even with the best intents in mind, an authority may ultimately decide on a course that we believe, “less than” wise. Therefore, we have a right and a duty to let an authority know when his decisions may not be in his best interests.

The Biblical basis of appeal can be found throughout Scripture. One of the best known examples was when God told Abraham that he was going to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Reading between the lines, we can surmise that Abraham was concerned about his nephew Lot. God was going to destroy Sodom, Lot was in Sodom and Abraham did not want his nephew to be killed with all the unrighteous (for what it is worth, this is the only reason I can see why Abraham would have been concerned about the fate of a city infamous for its wickedness). Abraham them “bargained” with God about the situation (Gen 18:23ff).

Now notice how Abraham approached thus issue. God had stated that He was about to do something; Abraham was concerned about the consequences and asked God to reconsider. God did not condemn him for this request therefore establishing that Abraham had a “right” to appeal; as long as it was done in the proper way. First, he was in right standing with God. He expressed His loyalty and support. He was not denying God’s right to do whatever He planned to do and he did not whine, complain or criticize God. He did not call God’s character, nature or wisdom into question. Instead, he appealed to God on the basis of His reputation (cf. Ex 32:9,10,12), His rightful authority (Gen 18:27,30,32) and His ultimate goals (Ex 32:13). In other words, because Abraham was in submission to God, he could then appeal to God to NOT do what He had said He was going to do because that would be contrary to His own goals and purposes. Abraham (and Moses in a different context) was never in rebellion when appealing.

One must also choose the right time to appeal, preferably not during a crises situation. When the enemy is shooting at your ship, and the bridge is on fire and casualties are being taken all around you, this is no time to complain to the Captain about the ward-room menu! Sometimes, decisions have to be made and there is no time for long drawn out debates about the merits of different positions. If we choose one of those times to call a leader’s choices into question, he simply may not be able to give our arguments the time and consideration that they would otherwise deserve. Thus a legitimate appeal that might well be heard and acted upon in one context may get a completely different response when the adrenaline is flowing, and the hormones are surging. It is arrogant to insist that one’s authority MUST answer our objections immediately. We are not ultimately responsible for the decisions that an authority makes; he is. Furthermore, at the wrong time, the authority may well perceive that the appeal is a direct threat to his authority, and therefore believe that he must say “NO!” This is an interesting dynamic here, not often understood.

Generally speaking (with many exceptions noted) men will respond in two ways to situations where the believe their authority is being challenged (1) they will either attempt to slap down the perceived insurrection or (2) completely fold and let someone else take over. Both situations can lead to disasters for everyone involved. Not only does the “bad” decision not get rescinded, but in the first case the man may act like a tyrant, making a difficult situation worse. Those under authority are going to suffer, whether from a harsh manner, spanking, firing, excommunication, etc.

In the second case, the man God has placed in authority has been unlawfully deposed. Since every aspect of life is governed by the providence of God, we are risking the Lord’s extreme displeasure. When we have lost the person God has placed over us, the family, business, church, etc., will often suffer from a power struggle wherein everyone loses. Wives might get their own way over their husbands, but lose their children in the process as they follow her example and grow up to be rebels. Kids might make Dad give up in disgust, only to find that he was being providentially used to protect them from great evils just waiting to pounce. Congregants might be able to force the pastor or elders to do their bidding, only to see the church self-destruct as various groups vie for power and control. The rule of thumb here is not to force your authority into a corner where he may feel it necessary to save face. A little sensitivity and common sense may see your appeal granted, with everyone benefiting.

Therefore all of us need to learn how to bite our tongue, shut our mouth, clench our fists, count to ten, or do whatever else is necessary and wait for the appropriate time, trusting that God is in control. This is especially true when we are being “corrected” by an authority. Our first, most natural response when accused of anything is to defend ourselves; which in and of itself is not unlawful. But since the heart is “deceitful and desperately wicked” we are not always the best judge of whether or not our actions were righteous. Trying to justify yourself when caught doing something wrong only makes things harder for everyone involved to repent and become right with God again.

Please note this little psychological dynamic; our authority accuses us of doing something wrong. We do not like admitting we did something wrong, so we defend ourselves. The authority then has to raise the ante trying to prove we were wrong. We raise the ante defending ourselves; often hurling accusations that the authority is not perfect and exposing his weaknesses, failures and sins. We then create a vicious cycle of antagonism with anger and frustration building up until something explodes. And what might explode is your marriage as husband or wife decides that enough is enough. It might mean losing your children as someone is kicked out of the house. It could entail being thrown out of or even destroying a good church because people insisted they were right and everyone else was wrong. Nobody wins in this kind of messy conflict; yet our stubborn pride will still insist, “I was right!”

True submission requires us to recognize the providence of God in even this kind of situation. If we do not agree with an accusation, we do not have to become indignant, outraged, angered or embittered. If God is in control, then He has allowed this situation to happen for a reason. We need to take a step back, and see if we can figure out what He would have us do. Rather than defending ourselves, we need to really LISTEN to what is being said. At least we need to respond with something like, “Thank you for your correction; please let me pray and think about this…”

As I grow older I am increasingly convinced that many of the issues that tear families, churches, businesses and relationships apart are actually fairly minor. I suspect that God was in fact more concerned about the way that we handled those insignificant issues, rather than who got their own way. Yet, we foolishly tear each other apart just to save our pride.

Yes, if falsely accused, we have the right to bring evidence to clear our good name; but let us also be aware that some of our greatest heroes in the faith were excommunicated from apostate churches, driven from their homelands under false indictments, persecuted, arrested, tortured and even murdered. Bad things happen; sometimes, there is no justice in this world. Therefore, when confronted by an authority, let us first look to God in humility lest we be in sin, and then again to Him in confidence that He will eventually make all things right. We certainly must not use this as an excuse to attack others; “Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult but give a blessing instead.”

Since all human authority is less than perfect and will not always “get it right” therefore, we must give them the opportunity to realize that a mistake has been made and some time to let them correct it on their own. If God placed them over us, He is working in THEIR lives even as He is working in ours. We can begin by letting them know that we share their concerns; that we do not wish to be rebellious; that we will listen carefully to what they say. We need to give our authority the confidence that he CAN correct a “misstep” without losing face, because he is confident that we support and stand behind him. We want him to be a success and will not think any the less of him, or lose any respect for him if he makes a mistake. But if we force a man to the wall at the wrong time and wrong place, many will just dig in their heels out of sheer stubbornness. Nobody wins, everybody loses and God is not glorified.

The authority must also be able to concentrate on what you are saying and why you think it important. This can seldom happen in a crisis situation; and let us be honest, most times, when we disagree with an authority’s judgment the consequences are not life-threatening. At worst, opportunities might be lost, or we might be inconvenienced. Most commonly the greatest threat we face is that we do not get our own way on something or our pride is injured in some way. So we need to put things in perspective; what is more important, having our own way or glorifying God? And if we are truly committed to glorifying God, we can extend a brother a little grace and time to sort things out.

Finally, we must appeal with the right attitude and words. Screaming, insulting, belittling, etc., an authority is never going to accomplish anything but make a bad situation worse. The more we argue, the worse it is going to be. Respect for authority means that we are humble before them, yes, that’s right, humble. In colonial America, wives would often address their husbands as “Mr.” as a token of respect. Now not for a moment am I recommending a return to that practice, but HOW we talk to one another says a lot about HOW we think about one another. Familiarity is not wrong, but I say with pride that my children address me as “sir.” Yes, they also call me “Daddy” and when they were younger it was often a real pain trying to read our evening story together when all six kids wanted to crawl into my lap at the same time. But what makes that love and affection so effectual is that it is based on respect.

My children occasionally appeal our decisions as parents on various subjects. Over the years, there have been occasions wherein my wife Elaine would listen to my reasons for a certain decision and raise one eyebrow slightly (a sure sign that she strongly disagreed). Because I was wise beyond my years and managed to snag a godly woman far better than I deserved, I trust my wife’s judgment implicitly. I know that if she questions something I have decided I would be a fool not to listen to her council. 99% of the time, the issue of appeal never arises because any decision we had to make, we worked through it together. However, on occasion, there have been things that I thought needed to be done, that for whatever reason were being neglected. When Elaine has to give me “the look” I know it is her way of saying, “Do you really mean that?” Most commonly, when I asked if she has a question or comment, it became clear that I did not communicate clearly why something had to be done the way I said it had to be done. By explaining in more detail, she then understood my goals better and therefore can more fully support them. Sometimes, when explaining things, she has pointed out factors I might have missed. I have no problem doing an about face as necessary because I KNOW that my wife is committed to making me a success. I do NOT have to fight to exercise authority in my home for my wife is NEVER rebellious, disrespectful, manipulative or undermining and therefore I have complete confidence that if she has a problem with a decision I have made, then I had better listen carefully.

As the children have grown up into responsible, godly young men and women, they have developed similar mature responses to lawful authority. Sometimes, they are more consistent in working out Biblical principles than we are as parents; after all, they do not have the baggage that Elaine and I have; they SHOULD think more Biblically than we do.

Sadly, our family’s approach is not as common as it ought to be in the Covenant community. Over the years I have sat in on numerous counseling cases where the wife publicly derides, degrades and humiliates her husband. They quarrel in public, they complain about each other to anyone and everyone who will listen and their homes are war zones with the children suffering the worst casualties. Almost universally I blame the husband for the problem. First, if the woman is a shrew, it is because he abdicated leadership in the home very early in the marriage. Secondly, almost always, the behavior the wife demonstrates was usually evident before they got married and he married her anyway. Thirdly, he could put a stop to it at any time if he would just stand up and exert some authority. But he won’t, so she doesn’t respect him and I cannot say I really blame her.

Of course, she is miserable and their entire family suffers (better to live in the corner of an attack than in a whole house with a contentious woman). But his sin does not justify or excuse her sin. The values of respect she should have learned from her father were missing, and now her husband does not have what it takes to teach them to her in the home (often because he never learned those values from HIS father). Their children pay the biggest price however; not only is their home torn apart by controversy, but they do not learn that rebellion always leads to disaster. They then replicate the same rebellious attitudes towards authority in their own lives. There is a connection between teenage immorality, drug use, delinquency and failing to learn how to respect and submit to authority.

When I have watched rebellious teenagers bring their parents so much grief, usually the problem can be traced back to failing to teach children to honor their parents when they were little. The parents did NOT do what they should have done then and everyone is suffering now. They did NOT exercise authority when they had the chance and the children grew up uncontrolled and undisciplined. They then turned that same lack of respect into rebellion against every other sphere of lawful authority.

The problem is that in our culture, we have been indoctrinated with the idea that we MUST act according to our feelings. When we do not get our own way, (or when we disagree with others), we can feel indignant, hurt, or frustrated. We then tend to justify those feelings both in internal and external dialogs. What most of us do not realize is that the way we speak to and about one another has a great deal of influence on our attitudes and feelings toward one another. If we feel oppressed, frustrated, annoyed or irritated about some authority over us, verbalizing those feelings only intensifies the attitude. However, if we follow the Scriptures, being kind, gentle, humble, and choosing our words with care, we will find that the emotions will change as well. Once we are calm inside, we can think more wisely about the problem, and how best to resolve it for the glory of God.

When an Appeal Fails…

But going back to our discussion of appealing a decision; what happens if an appeal does not work? What happens if you have done everything right, with the right attitude and right motivation and right words and EVERYTHING and still the authority wants you to do something you sincerely think is wrong? There are three main options; one may flee, one may submit or one may resist. Each alternative has serious consequences and determining which response we choose will require humility and wisdom.

First, we may flee from an attempt to impose unlawful authority. This principle can be seen in the Exodus of God’s people from Egypt. They came into the land as free men. They were subsequently enslaved by tyrannical government. When they prayed for deliverance, God allowed them to flee Egypt and go to the Promised Land. In the same way, when David was unlawfully persecuted by Saul, he fled (with others) from Saul’s authority; he left the country and even sojourned amongst pagans for a while. David did not lead a revolutionary army against Saul, for even though he became a tyrant, reprobate and demon possessed, Saul was still the anointed king. David simply fled his jurisdiction and waited for God to remember His covenant promises.

Most Americans who can trace their ancestry back more than a few generations have this principle of fleeing tyranny as a part of their national heritage. We came from many different countries, to escape religious, political and economic tyranny. Sadly, there are few places to flee political tyranny today. I have visited many countries in the world and the USA for all its faults and problems is as good as it gets.

However, this remains a valid option for many other areas of life, For example, a church, telling people whom they may marry, where they may live, what jobs they may take, etc., is clearly acting tyrannically. God has not given the church authority over these areas of life. They may counsel, advice, and encourage their members to make better decisions; but they do not have the right to use the powers of the church to tell people how to live their lives unless sin is involved. Confronting sin is one issue; disagreeing with someone else’s decisions is a whole different matter. Therefore, one may lawfully flee from their authority and go to a new church. In the same way, if a wife is in physical danger from an abusive husband, she may lawfully flee (ideally after seeking counsel from her elders). If one is working for a bad boss one may “flee” to another company.

Obviously this principle can be misused by rebellious people who want no authority over them. It is easy for some to cry “tyranny” whenever an authority tells them to do anything they do not want to do and therefore implicitly embrace some form of autonomy or rebellion. For example, people have”fled” our church because we teach and require that men be the heads of their households and conduct consistent family worship. While we have never threatened or used formal church discipline against anyone for not fulfilling what we think is a basic Christian duty, some people have resented the fact that we constantly exhort fathers in this regard. They have left us; and we let them go with sincere regret, but also confident that God will work in their lives according to His time table and not ours. I have known children to leave home the day they reached 18 just because they did not like their parents’ house rules. I have seen people go from job to job because they did not like various employers’ ways of doing things. In all these cases, while I have my own private opinions, ultimately, with liberty comes responsibility; each person will have to stand accountable to God not only for what they did, but why they did it.

The solution begins by Christians thinking carefully about the covenants they have made with various institutions. The better we articulate up front the duties and responsibilities that both sides have in any relationship, the easier it is to discern between legitimate but unpopular demands from an authority and genuine tyranny. God of course establishes certain fundamental conditions in all these areas but there is much that He has not specifically legislated. Instead, He gives us general principles and expects us to work those out in practical ways.

Hence, bosses should clearly write out the standards and expectations for their company and instruct new employees in what is expected of them. Churches need to articulate their doctrinal standards for new members and the “house rules” under which everyone agrees to abide. Parents need to teach their children exactly what constitutes proper behavior and be consistent in enforcing their own rules. Men and women interested in getting married to each other ought to spend a lot of time talking about how they understand their roles and responsibilities in marriage before they decide to “tie the knot.”

In other words, often people become frustrated with authority because the conditions of the covenant were not spelled out. Both sides assumed the other was “on board” with THEIR understanding until a conflict arose over some issue. The conflict then quickly degenerated into warfare because both sides felt that they have been betrayed. Simply writing out the conditions of the covenant will do much to sort out these kinds of misunderstandings. Furthermore, if the conditions are unacceptable, then one often has freedom NOT to enter into a potentially devastating relationship where one side eventually cries “tyranny” and the other side responds “rebellion!”

The second option to an unreasonable authority is simple; you submit. Even if you have to suffer, you submit. This is what Peter commends Sarah for doing (1 Peter 3:1ff). When Abraham told her to pose as his sister, and as a result got her kidnapped TWICE, she still submitted. She did not stage a walk out, deny him marital intimacy, burn his supper, gather all the women of the encampment together and carry signs decrying Abraham’s bad leadership; she submitted. Granted, no human authority can command us to sin, so if an evil and perverse husband wants to swap wives a godly woman may rightly say “No.” A worker may rightly refuse to sign counterfeit work orders. An enlisted man may rightly refuse an order from his officer to execute POW’s. A citizen may rightly refuse to offer incense to a State idol. But in all honesty, aren’t those situations so much fun to discuss because they are so rare? Isn’t the real problem less about when we are commanded to do something contrary to God’s Law, but more about when we are commanded to do something we don’t want to do? When you submit to an authority even when they are in error, you are allowing yourself to be used by God as a means of changing that authority; even if you have to suffer as a result.

And while under certain conditions we may flee “tyranny” but in doing so we are also losing all the benefits of that authority. A wife may have a husband who does not appreciate, respect or fulfill his divine duties towards her as she would like and reasonably expect. She may (emphasis on “may”) have a lawful right to flee since he has broken covenant with her. On the other hand, she may choose to stay and be used by God as a witness to him (note; we are not talking about a situation where her life is in danger). By submitting, she is also preserving the economic capital of the family and providing for her children; something a divorce may well destroy.

A church may have less than perfect doctrine or programs and a conscientious believer may lawfully seek one better grounded in good teaching. But if he flees he will lose all the good things that church is doing, the friendships he has made, the programs that do benefit his children, etc. He may decide to stay in that congregation because his presence can have a positive effect in moving the elders to a more sound theological understanding.

A young adult may weary of his parents’ influence on his decisions and after reaching the age of majority, decide he wants to leave home. But in doing so, he incurs tremendous economic costs he would not otherwise have to pay and he risks losing the wisdom that comes from his parents’ life experience (and risks’ losing their moral guidance as his quest for “freedom” is often motivated by a desire to sin without being confronted).

Yes, staying often comes at a price; we have to be prepared to suffer the consequences. We live in an imperfect world and we are often forced to make trade-offs. Wisdom requires knowing what things are really important and worth fighting for and being willing to let the little things go. Every good marriage demands both husband and wife appreciate the good things about the other, while learning to live with the not so good things. There are no perfect people, no perfect institutions, and no perfect choices. We need to be charitable and gracious to people who make different decisions. Sometimes, one person may make a decision in this regard that we personally would not; ultimately each of us will stand before God and give an account of why we did whatever it is that we did. Furthermore, the person making the decision is the one who is going to have to suffer the consequences.

Take the State as an example; I believe our present system of taxation is unlawful, tyrannical and a symptom of God’s judgment against our land. I therefore have the same three options we have been discussing. I can flee what I see as the tyranny of the IRS by moving to a different country; I can resist by refusing to pay unjust, unconstitutional taxes or I can submit. Which option did I choose? Well I could try to flee but I know of no place in the modern world where I could escape the same kind of tyranny. I could resist and refuse to pay those unlawful taxes but that would mean being arrested, losing my house, having my meager savings confiscated, impoverishing my family not to mention going to a federal prison. ALL resistance to authority, even lawful resistance, has severe consequences; therefore I submit. I pay my taxes, all of them; even the unlawful ones.

Generally speaking, it is frequently better to submit to unjust authority than to resist (unless it is a matter of sin), because the cost of submission is considerably less than the cost of resistance. A woman watching her husband waste her children’s inheritance by gambling is paying a price. A worker who finds his boss taking credit for his ideas suffers. A church member who submits to a bad decision from his elders may have to live with the unpleasant consequence. But in all these cases, for the sake of the peace and purity of church, family, job, etc., a Christian may well decide that the price of suffering for righteous submission is better than the costs of fleeing.

The final alternative is to resist. In this sense, to “resist” means to actually take a stand against an authority and seek either to change it, or remove it. The ethical condition that must be met for lawful resistance is that the authority is attempting to compel us to sin. This was the situation with Peter and John and the Sanhedrin mentioned earlier. When a lawful authority ordered an unlawful act they refused to obey. However, this is not an individual right that one can determine on their own. Since God has ordered all of life with mutually affirming spheres of authority, when one sphere attempts to compel unlawful obedience, we should first turn to other authorities for aid.

The doctrine of resistance was fully hammered out during the English civil war and the Westminster Assembly and is commonly called “the lesser magistrate.” In any sphere of authority there are many levels. For example in the civil realm there towns, counties, states and national. In the church there are pastors, elders, deacons, sessions, presbyteries, general assemblies, etc. In the family there is both a mother and a father, in the work place there are foremen, supervisors, managers, etc.

If one authority attempts to break covenant, then the individual can lawfully appeal to the intervening levels for relief. For example, if the President of the United States attempted to overthrow the Constitution, free men could lawfully appeal to either the Congress, governors or state legislatures who could then, if necessary, call to take up arms to resist the Federal Government. This was the theology used to in the Declaration of Independence to justify resisting England. In essence, the colonial legislatures sent delegates to Philadelphia who established that England’s king had broken faith with his people. Therefore, they were justified in removing him as their sovereign. This action did not occur in a vacuum; the English had done exactly the same thing in their Civil War a hundred and thirty years earlier when they beheaded Charles Stuart. However, neither event was a revolution, but the parliament and legislature having lawful authority to depose a tyrant. Individuals did not take up arms against lawful authority but appealed to “lesser” authorities for help.

However, resistance comes at a price and may not always succeed. The last time this was tried in America was in the War Between the States when the South attempted to secede from the Union. The Southern States voted to withdraw from what they considered to be a tyrannical Union. A horrible war then began which costs more casualties than all of America’s other wars combined. We are still living with the scars of that war and it profoundly changed the very nature of American civil government.

As our nation has rejected God and embraced humanism, the Federal government has continued to usurp more and more power from the States. Many sincere believers are gravely concerned about losing any more freedoms and some have even openly rebelled. Some people have moved to rural areas and tried to establish self-sufficient lifestyles or communities where they hope to live freely. Some have tried to drop off the “radar” and hope the Federal government will forget about them. Occasionally however, these people or groups have found themselves in conflict with the Federal government anyway.

For what it is worth, I think the murders at Ruby Ridge or the massacre at Waco were terrible acts from an unrighteous government. The people who ordered those attacks will stand before God one day. But at the same time, the leaders (Weaver and Koresh) will also have to stand before God and answer for their decision to resist. Was it worth the lives of all those women and children for them to take arms against government agents? Yes, both were attacked unlawfully; both were attempting to flee what they considered unrighteous indictments. However, what would have happened if Weaver or Koresh had simply surrendered and had their day in court? Could the Federal government have even convicted them of a crime? Even if they had been wrongfully convicted, they would have spent only a few years in prison. But what was the alternative? Is escaping prison worth all those lives? Sometimes we have to be prepared to suffer little things to protect greater ones. It is not right, it is not fair, it is a terrible infringement on our liberty; but we live in a world cursed by sin.

In other words, at Ruby Ridge or Waco, innocent people died because the leaders resisted an erring authority. However, the right to resist, at least according to historic Reformed theology is not found in an individual, but in a “lesser magistrate.” I am not forgetting that sometimes, a man MUST resist, no matter what the cost; but it has to be done with proper authority; neither Weaver nor Koresh had such authority. And we should note that in both cases, both men had adopted an apocalyptic eschatology where they believed the world as we know it was about to end in horrible civil unrest. Both expected terrible things to happen and so became victims of self-fulfilling prophecies.

However, let us also be realistic here; for the vast majority of us, those situations are extremely rare. Usually, the issue is not about rogue Federal agents, but an erring husband, a recalcitrant board of elders, arbitrary parents, or an inefficient boss. Are we ever justified in resisting such authorities and if so, how?

Well, the doctrine of the lesser magistrate applies even to these more mundane situations. A husband who is consistently failing in his domestic duties is still under the authority of his church. A wife can appeal to these “lesser magistrates” and ask for their counsel, and assistance. Most companies have some sort of procedure to appeal certain concerns “up the chain of command” if a particular boss is in danger of doing something immoral, illegal or just not in the company’s best interests. Even children can appeal a decision from Dad, to their Mom under certain circumstances. In all of these areas however, we may never arrogantly defy a lawful authority. All the general principles of Christian conduct come into play here; we are called to be kind, to speak the truth in love, to be humble, to be not be contentious, argumentative or combative come into play. “A harsh word stirs up anger but a gentle answer turns away wrath” Solomon said. Lawful resistance is simply saying, “No, I will not do what you told me to do because it is wrong.” We can say that with genuine respect; as David spoke to and about Saul. And yes, sometimes immoral pastors have to be defrocked, wicked husbands have to be divorced and illegal company activities have to be exposed. And sometimes, wicked tyrants must be removed. But we will be held accountable for our reasons, our attitudes and our methods of dealing with such problems; and may God grant us all grace.

Conclusion

In this essay we have tried to deal primarily with the basic principles where people live day by day. In our lawless age, men often struggle against authority; and always to their detriment. An attitude of submission is not blind obedience, but rather confidence in the sovereignty of God. It ought to be our goal to live a quiet life, without interference from others and to live at peace whenever possible with all men. Therefore, a humble attitude towards all human authority is required. Those placed in positions of authority must responsibly and self-sacrificially care for those placed under them remembering that God will hold them accountable. Those under authority must remember that God put those over them and expects us to honor them, as we would Him.

So often, so many problems could be avoided if we simply bent our stiff necks a little. While nobody likes to be wrong, the wise man will thrive on correction (Pvbs 12:1). Like water off a duck’s back, we need to allow indignities and grievance to just wash over us. This too shall pass, and there is a new day coming. Sometimes there is nothing else we can do at this present evil time except allow God a chance to work. Families, businesses, churches and communities would all profit from our example of respect and acknowledgment that God’s providence is at work.

If wives cannot respect their husbands, and if husbands cannot earn their wives’ respect and their children’s obedience in the home, why should God ever give them power in the community? And if husbands cannot manage their own families, what makes them think God would allow them to rule a nation? If members cannot submit to their churches, and churches exercise lawful authority without tyranny, why should God bless their preaching?

Our God is sovereign. He will do all that He has said He will do. But perhaps one of the reasons why we do not yet see the all the blessings He has promised is that because we are in rebellion to His lawfully constituted authorities, we are in reality, in rebellion to Him.

Application: Case Files to Analyze

Based on the principles discussed in the essay above, discuss the following cases and apply the relevant Biblical principles. How would you counsel these people?

Case #1 Sixteen year old Sally and her mother have a disagreement about her wardrobe. Her Mom thinks her skirt is too short. Sally insists that her skirt is the current “style,” and though short, is not immodest and is the only style readily available in the stores. What should they do?

Case #2 Ted really detests his 17 year old son Andy’s taste in music. He finds it obnoxious, irritating, and disturbing to his peace. Andy responds that the music is not immoral, the bands he likes are Christians, and the lyrics are based in Scripture. What should they do?

Case #3 Sarah thinks her husband George is spending too much money every month on entertainment. George thinks Sarah is spending too much money every month on clothes. What should they do?

Case #4 Debbie is eighteen and now attending a local college. She has met a nice Christian guy from a different denominational/theological background who wants to date her. Debbie’s family has always maintained that “dating” is inappropriate and forbidden it. What should she do? Would it make any difference if she lived away at college instead of commuting?

Case #5 Frank is upset because the church has budgeted for a new building and is giving practically nothing to mission’s this year. He fought hard for the missions work but lost in the annual business meeting. What should he do?

Case #6 Mary is concerned because her husband does not do consistent family worship. What should she do? What should she not do?

Case #7 George is 23 years old and after receiving permission from his father, asked Helen to marry him. However, when he asked the pastor to perform the ceremony, the pastor refused because he believes that Helen is not really a Christian. Furthermore, he has been forbidden to marry her on threat of excommunication (since is she is not a Christian, he would be “unequally yoked”). What should he do?

Case #8 Daryl thinks that the elders are seriously mismanaging the government of his local church. He disagrees with the programs they have developed, how they are utilizing limited funds and even how the pastor spends his time. He has developed his own plan on how the church ought to proceed and offered it as an alternative to the elders. They however reject his plan politely, but firmly. What should he do?

Case #9 Lisa married a non-Christian who now forbids her from their children at home. He wants the boys to be able to play sports as he did and sees no problem with the children dating as they get older. What should she do?

How Not to Argue for Authority

The below was written originally for some folks in our church many years ago as my attempt to help them work through a conflict; it back-fired, managing to offend everyone on both sides of the issue. None of the people mentioned now attend our church. Initially I never intended to publish this- but after certain people left the church I decided that others, not so personally involved, might see things more objectively and learn before something similar destroyed their fellowship. While I changed some of the minor details my intent was always to illustrate how a disagreement could escalate into a church splitting schism because neither side properly understood the nature of Biblical submission. Often, when sincere Christians object to the issue of submission, especially in regards to marriage, it is not the Bible that is being rejected, but the way that the Bible’s teaching is being presented. This essay covers some of the same ground as the previous one, but it does not hurt to see the same principles applied to different situations.

Some years back I had to leave church fairly quickly after the morning service and in my absence, several members of the congregation found themselves in a long, heated discussions. Apparently “Bob” (real name withheld to protect the guilty) had been having a recurring debate with “Betty” on the issue of whether when Scripture commands a woman to “respect” and “submit” to her husband, this entailed obedience. This had started as a good natured discussion. But on this particular Sunday, a number of other women were in close proximity when “Bob” and “Betty” began “tweaking” each other.

As “Bob” was trying to demonstrate that submission requires obedience, the question arose “if a man orders his wife to fetch him a glass of water, MUST she obey him” (with a good heart)? “Bob’s” answer was “of course” and was shocked when everyone did not immediately agree with something he thought so fundamentally clear in Scripture. “Bob” then considered the entire church to be full of feminist women, and limp-wristed men lacking a full complement of male hormones.

Since I did not witness the discussion I had to base any assessment on the testimony of others. So, when I heard that a discussion had taken place that left some people very unhappy, I called all the principles involved, listened to each side of the story and tried to understand not only what had happened, but also what, if anything could have been done differently.

Despite “Bob’s” assessment, I did not believe that the women in our church were all implicit feminists, or their husbands “girly-men.” Granted, many Christians need to develop a more consistent, Biblical worldview and learn how to relate every area of life to King Jesus; but even though they might not have worked out all the details, I was convinced that they wanted to, given time. As I talked with various people it appeared that there were undertones here of which poor “Bob” had been unaware that framed the context of the question - as well as what would constitute an acceptable answer. In my view, people were talking past each other. Neither side really understood the other’s position and so created animosity and resistance to an important Biblical doctrine.

For example, one of the women had a son-in law who was by all accounts a lazy slob who treated her daughter like dirt. This man used the doctrine of wifely submission, as an excuse to sit in his favorite chair, watch television, and order his wife around in the most menial, and demeaning way, with no regard for her needs, or his responsibilities. These parents saw something desperately lacking in the relationship between their daughter and son-in-law; something so seriously wrong that it could not be dealt with by a simple “yes she must submit unconditionally.” They were not exactly sure how this problem was to be resolved because they did not think as quickly or as clearly as “Bob.” However, they knew the answer was more complex than just saying, “A wife has to obey her husband and get him the glass of water.”

Though I was not there (and hindsight is always 20-20), I think several logical fallacies were committed that confused the issue. First, “Bob’s” favorite method of discussion was to “argue to the antithesis” wherein he would attempt to show the logical conclusions of a person’s position. However, this can be tricky as the problem of “false extension” is always a possibility. There is a difference between showing where a person’s arguments could lead and where they necessarily must lead. Outside of a formal academic debate, most people are not trained in formal argumentation; hence they do not choose their words with precision. Therefore someone quick enough can twist what someone says and extend that misunderstanding in directions the speaker never intended.

Secondly, there was also the very real danger of “faulty dilemma.” A faulty dilemma is insisting that there are only two options and forcing people to choose between them, when in reality, there may be other options available or other factors that are not mentioned. In “Bob’s” case his answer was that the woman HAD a moral responsibility to get the water or she was in rebellion. Whether he intended to or not, people THOUGHT he was saying that a wife’s submission to her husband makes her literally no different than a serving wench. But are these really the only factors here? Yes a man MAY ask his wife to get him a glass of water, and normally speaking she should comply, BUT what is the motivation and purpose of the husband in issuing the command in the first place? One of the ladies specifically said that while the husbands had the “right” to have his wife get him a glass of water, she could not see a godly man doing so because it would not seem to her as if he was loving her has Christ loved the church; more about this later.

Hence, I think people reacted against the unintentional and unbiblical characterization of the wife’s role rather than against the Biblical doctrine of submission per se. In essence, “Bob” was perceived as sounding as if a husband has absolute authority over his wife. But of course, all human authority is derivative; only God has absolute authority and EVERY human institution must operate only under God’s specific limitations.

Furthermore, whenever authority is given to someone, there is also a corresponding responsibility to protect, and care for the person under authority. In Ephesians 5:21ff the Apostle Paul deals with submission in three main areas; between husband and wife, parent and child and master and slave. In each relationship there is genuine authority that those under that authority have to respect and obey; i.e., wives must respect and obey their husbands, children must honor and obey their parents and slaves must respect and obey their masters. Yet in EVERY case, Paul also details the corresponding duty that those IN authority have to those UNDER their care. The husband must give himself up for his wife, the father must not exasperate his children, and the master must not threaten his slave. Authority and Responsibility are two sides of the same relational coin; both are essential and necessary for a proper, Biblical understanding of the issue. When “Bob” emphasized the one and was perceived to ignore the other, people rejected his argument. He then considered them all “feminists.” But they were not necessarily rejecting God’s instruction to godly wives, just his characterization which did not deal with the responsibilities inherent with all Biblical authority.

God gives real, lawful authority to various human institutions; family, church and state. But none of those institutions are ultimate and all are bound to operate within the specific limits that God himself sets, for the purposes He Himself specifically delineates. For example, “Bob” was quick to rule out an ungodly husband trying to order his wife to sin; clearly he recognized there are limits to submission. But I would go one step further and argue that the attitude behind authority is always central to the discussion. As my old friend Dave Ames liked to say, “Authority is never given for the benefit of those IN authority, but for the benefit of those UNDER authority.” This is what the Lord Jesus Himself said to His Disciples, not to seek to lord it over each other, but rather to become the servant of all. “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom to many.”

Since a man is commanded by God to work for the sanctification of his wife and is given authority for that purpose, he MUST ask himself, “How does this contribute to her holiness?” A man’s wife is not his personal servant; her divine duty to submit to his leadership does not give him the right to treat her in a degrading and demeaning manner. To the contrary, he is HER servant; his authority over her is specifically delegated by God so that the husband can assist in his wife’s sanctification. Therefore, a godly woman gladly submits to a godly husband because she is confident that he is committed to her personal holiness. A godly man does not issue arbitrary orders to his wife as if she was there just to serve his personal desires.

However, let us be careful here; what one woman may consider “demeaning” another may take as her normal duty. When Elaine and I were first married, I would often want a cup of tea in the evening. I would go into our little “kitchenette” and yell “Hey Honey, do you want a cup of tea?” as I put the kettle on. Elaine was offended! You see, in her family, part of being a good homemaker meant anticipating a husband’s desires. When I offered to make HER a cup of tea, she automatically took it as an implied criticism of how she handling her domestic duties. It was not a part of English culture to directly confront an issue; the Brits just love to give hints and “read between the lines.” Therefore in her mind, I had been sitting there desperate for a cup of tea, expecting her to offer it and when she did not do so, my making my own tea was intended to be a rebuke that she had not correctly read the “signs.” Yeah, I know, a different way of thinking about things than is common in American culture; but there is also a reason why we Yanks have a worldwide reputation for being loud, confrontational and obnoxious!

Once, we had that straightened out, I learned just to ask Elaine for a cup of tea. She was happy, I was OK with it (I am NOT a cripple, I CAN get my own cup of tea!) but we have taken a lot of flack over the years about this issue. People, who do not know either Elaine or me very well, often feel free to criticize when I ask my wife for a cup of tea! Obviously, I must be some sort of terrible, nasty person, abusing my poor wife because I ask her to do something for me that I could easily do myself.

There of course is the problem; too many Christians find it perfectly acceptable to judge and criticize others based on their own personal standards. Furthermore, in our culture, giving anyone a direct order will often be seen as abusive. When I was a junior NCO in the Air Force, almost thirty years ago we were told NOT to give direct orders, but rather to phrase them as requests! And there is some rationality to this; no one likes being treated like a slave. Phrasing things as a request is just polite, civilized behavior; as long as we understand that there are real positional differences between say a colonel and an airman, it certainly does no harm for the colonel to treat his people with courtesy and phrase his orders as a request. That is; as long as the airman actually understands he must treat that request as the order it really is.

Now, back to our main point; women are under the positional authority of their husbands. A godly husband, treating his wife with respect and dignity certainly has the right to ask her to do certain things, and normally speaking, she should obey. The fact that our culture finds this “demeaning” should not influence our understanding and application of a clear Biblical principle. Yet, we cannot leave it there.

Let me go one step further than the original question asked “Bob;” after all, fetching a glass of water is pretty innocuous. Can a man lawfully order his wife to cut his toenails for him? Yes, I know, a gross illustration, but I want to use “Bob’s” methodology and force us to be consistent with our presuppositions. Now we are not talking about some guy who is handicapped or otherwise physically unable to do this necessary but unpleasant task for himself; but a normal man, in good condition who simply does not want to bend over and clip his smelly nails. Does his wife have to obey even here?

Well, we could argue that God has given the husband genuine authority over his wife, just as He has given them both genuine authority over their children. There is nothing inherently sinful or unlawful about this command. Therefore you could conclude that a woman should obey her husband in this illustration. But we cannot end the discussion there because the motivations and reasons of the husband requiring his wife to perform this unpleasant task are crucial. Does this man really love his wife as Christ loved the church, giving himself up for her when he makes her do something demeaning; something he could easily do for himself? In making her cut his toenails, is he helping her to become “perfect, spotless, without wrinkle or blame?” Or is he just some self-indulgent slob who enjoys ordering his poor wife around?

I think that when the question was asked about the water, and “Bob” gave his answer, people may well have been reacting to what they perceived to be the attitude behind the order, rather than the Biblical duty of a godly woman to obey her husband. You see, the world continues to pervert the doctrine of godly submission and characterizes it as demeaning to women. While we do not care a fig for their opinion, we also have to be careful not to give them any ammunition they can use against us.

And honesty forces us to admit that there are some men who are obnoxious louts who treat their wives and children little better than hired hands. And we should always be ready to condemn such ungodly distortions of the Biblical doctrine of submission; a wife is NOT a slave or a servant. She and her husband become one flesh, united in spirit, mind and body to exercise dominion over the earth for the glory of God. She is a joint heir of the faith, and must be lived with in an understanding manner, and treated accordingly (1 Peter 3:5-7). The authority God grants the husband should never be abused.

However, let us also acknowledge that families are different. In many households, a young girl is taught from a young age that she reaches her highest calling in fulfilling her domestic duties. Cooking, cleaning and caring for her family’s physical needs are considered the highest expression of love. This has been the traditional view in Western civilization for thousands of years. Thus, for many godly women, “waiting” on their husbands and children is in THEIR view, both their honor and their duty. Our culture however has changed in the past fifty years. Many families are dependant on two incomes to survive. Feminism has infiltrated the Christian community and has brought with it, a change in values and standards that do need to be examined from a consistently Biblical perspective. Many young women therefore have come to expect that all domestic duties are to be shared by both husband and wife. And let us be honest here; there is nothing in Scripture that says it is the wife’s duty to do the dishes, clean the house, do the laundry, or even cook the meals! (Please note the Proverbs 31 woman had servants to do all these things for her!). So, a couple might well get married and have to work out some of these cultural applications in context of the universal moral principles lain down in Scripture. It is very likely that different Christian families will work out the implications differently; to the degree that they understand sound doctrine and their own sanctification.

Granted in my limited experience, I have not seen many Christian men acting like tyrants. For what it is worth, I think “Bob” had an important point in that the real problem in most marriages is emasculated, feminized men (e.g., see my essay, “Girlie-Men in the Pulpit). Many young Christian women have developed core values from secular American culture, not the Scriptures and therefore have never learned what submission actually entails. Furthermore, since we believe in total depravity we know that all men can be tempted to abuse and misuse authority. That’s why we have checks and balances for the civil magistrate, and we Presbyterians have church courts that have authority over individual ministers. As the doctrine of godly submission is rediscovered in the Christian community, there will also be greater opportunity for its abuse by some sinful men. Hence, it is only proper that like the Apostle Paul we ALWAYS pair the doctrine of submission to the corresponding responsibility of those in authority. He knew that men would misuse that authority unless specifically reminded of their responsibilities; and we would do well to emulate his approach.

Thus while trying to argue submission without addressing the corresponding duty of the man, “Bob” quite possibly caused people to react to his imbalanced view rather than necessarily denying the duty of the woman to obey. This whole situation illustrates several important principles from Scripture about conversations. The first is “Let every man be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger.” There is often a much more complex situation affecting even the most innocent of questions. If we want to avoid unnecessary conflicts, we need to carefully discern the real agenda behind a person’s words. We also need to be careful to listen to what people actually say, rather than speculate about what they might have meant by what they said. Not everyone is as articulate as they might be; not every one can think quickly on their feet. Not every Christians has worked out a consistent Biblical worldview.

Therefore, the second Biblical principle from 2 Timothy 2:23-24 is important to keep in mind, “And the Lord’s bondservant must not be quarrelsome, but kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance, leading to a knowledge of the truth.” Since issues are often more complex than what they first appear, a gentle answer, full of kindness and good will toward another helps to keep a theoretical discussion from degenerating into a heated altercation. Furthermore, even if a godly person believes they are being wronged when they are defending the truth of God’s Word, they are required by God to be patient, gently correcting others knowing that God alone can change the heart. In this case, if BOTH sides had practiced these principles, the discussion might have shed more light, and less heat. For what it is worth, I think everyone involved made a “rush to judgment” because they did not really understand what the other side was trying to say.

One final application of these two principles; we need to be careful in the way we look at other peoples’ relationships. I assume that all Biblical Christians would agree that a man has a solemn responsibility to serve his wife by giving himself up for her, working to sanctify her before God. She has a solemn duty to respect, submit and obey her husband. Yet, those outside of the husband and wife relationship need to be very careful in judging that relationship, or how well each person is fulfilling their God given duties. The man is responsible to GOD and his wife to love her as Christ loved the church, not to you or me. While, if his sin becomes odious, he may be answerable to the church courts (i.e., he attempts to command his wife to sin, he refuses to do family worship, etc.), we ought to be mighty careful either having or offering opinions about how well he is doing his job – one way or the other. Frankly, it is none of our business how a couple works out THEIR salvation with fear and trembling. Unless they come to us for counsel and advice, we may be unaware of certain facts that COULD change our assessment of the same situation.

Oh, we can certainly be as iron sharpening iron, encouraging, exhorting and even admonishing one another to become more godly and holy in how we fulfill our duties to our spouses. We can speak the truth in love to one another (Eph 4:15) and try to help one another put those truths into practice (Col 3:16). For example, if we witness a man berating his wife in public, ridiculing and demeaning her with harsh words, it is perfectly correct and proper to go to him in private and correct him. If we witness a woman openly deriding her husband’s authority and showing contempt for his leadership, we can and should go to her in private and confront. But in both cases, we commit the logical fallacy of hasty conclusion if we then over-generalize about their relationship to conclude that he is an arrogant nob or she is a rebellious witch. There may well be other factors that contributed to that particular unpleasant behavior of which we are aware. Instead, we need to stop classifying people based on limited knowledge, and start following Matthew 18:15 confronting individual sins and problems, rather than holding them inside or making caustic remarks about people to others.

Christians would be better off working on their own marriages than being unduly concerned about the marriages of others. Too many Christians seem more interested in spotting the splinters in other people’s eyes than dealing with the logs in their own. Even worse, too many Christians feel free to discuss other peoples’ marriages (or families, or hobbies, or spending, or housekeeping…). We all have blind spots, and NONE of us has it completely together. There is room for improvement in even the best marriages. So we ought to be careful judging others, lest we be judged ourselves.

In conclusion, wives must respect and obey their husbands, but husbands have to give themselves up for their wives, working to sanctify them before God. Loving, self-sacrificial service is the key to dominion, “Let he who would be great among you, first become the servant of all.”

___________________

Tolerance and Liberty of Conscience

This essay was originally written for a book published by the Chalcedon Foundation that dealt with certain dangerous doctrines that were infiltrating the Reformed community. The entire book was a good faith attempt to differentiate between legitimate doctrinal differences that would allow believers from different perspectives to work and minister together and those who had “crossed the line” and embraced some form of “heresy.” I wrote several chapters for that book one of which is below. It relates to our discussion of authority in that even the strictest theological systems of the Reformation recognized implicitly that there were some issues on which not even the church could attempt to bind men’s consciences. This section is included because it provides a necessary counter-weight to our admonitions about the importance of obeying lawful authority. God alone is the Lord of the conscience and no authority, whether in the State, the Church or the Family should over-step its bounds. Though the essay deals primarily with theological issues, it applies to all authority in every sphere of life. Where God has legislated, we must obey. Where God has given liberty, we must not infringe. Lawful authority never implies tyranny.

A charge of “heresy” is indeed a serious one and not to be made lightly. For as we have defined the term here, heresy is doctrinal error so wrong, that a person believing, affirming and teaching it could not be saved. Therefore it is important NOT to throw this charge around lightly. Not every doctrinal deviation is heresy. Since all men are imperfect, all men have imperfect understanding of the Scriptures. Since all men are different, not all men have the same level of wisdom or understanding. Therefore there are those in the church who hold to less than perfect doctrines, but are nevertheless considered within the household of the faith. For example, children and new believers often do not possess a consistent and comprehensive understanding of the Scriptures and frequently may for a time, affirm something contrary to sound doctrine. Grace, gentle correction and exposure to the truth is normally all that is needed to clear up these kinds of errors and bring them to a deeper, richer understanding of the truth.

But there are also doctrinal differences that divide more mature believers who sincerely hold to different doctrinal positions, yet they display all the characteristics of mature, godly, Christian life and practice. They are humble in their attitude, express genuine love and commitment to the Sacred Scriptures, have abundant evidence of the fruit of the Spirit and in all other ways APPEAR to trust in Christ and Christ alone, for their salvation. Yet, the doctrinal differences are there. Some refuse baptism to covenant children, others affirm a confused understanding of “free” will, still others insist that certain “gifts” of the Spirit are still operative in the church. Even within Reformed churches, there are often significant theological differences between various groups. Some insist that we may sing only Psalms in worship (without any musical accompaniment) while others believe hymns and choruses are perfectly appropriate. There are certain groups who insist that any church not holding to the Solemn League and Covenant is by nature apostate while many Presbyterians think this nothing more than an interesting historical relic from the past. Some Reformed believers are premillennial, some amillennial and some postmillennial.

The differences are real, and we cannot simply excommunicate all those who hold to different theological positions unless we want to be in the unenviable position of insisting, “We are the only true church, all others are apostate.” Such grandiose claims probably reveal more about the psychological and emotional problems of its adherents, than it does about the “purity” of their doctrine. But the question is, how do Christians deal with the very real differences that separate them from others, without falling into a hopeless subjectivity that destroys any claim to ultimate truth? The Bible IS God’s Word and it IS the final authority in matters of faith and practice. How then do sincere Christians deal with different interpretations of its teachings? Furthermore, the historic Reformed faith, as hammered out in detail by the great Reformation creeds, is today held by only a handful of believers, in comparison to broad evangelicalism. Baptists make up the single largest group of Protestants in America today, with Pentecostal and Charismatic groups closing the gap. If in fact the Reformed Faith IS an accurate and reliable summary of Bible doctrine, how do we deal with all those in the church of Christ whose doctrine significantly departs from historic orthodoxy?

Sociological Reasons for Doctrinal Diversity

While Christians must begin with Scripture in order to understand the nature of the world, we ought also to be aware that there are other factors that affect our understanding of Scripture. Man is not a blank slate. Scripture affirms the validity of the pagan proverb, “bad company corrupts good morals…” (1 Cor 15:33). In other words, a man does not arrive at his belief structure in a vacuum. There are environmental factors that act on him, just as there are spiritual ones. Furthermore, the Scriptures warn repeatedly of the dangers that false teachers cause to the body of Christ. Hence most Christians arrive at their understanding of the Faith from what they are taught by their pastors, what they read in books and what is believed by those around them. If they have good pastors, read good books and are in fellowships where good doctrine is normal, then they too will have good doctrine. But if the opposite is true, then generally speaking, their doctrine will reflect this too.

It simply is not enough to say that all men should be Bible scholars and depend upon their own intelligence, wisdom and understanding to arrive at doctrinal truth. God gives the church pastors and teachers who have the responsibility to TEACH His people (Eph 4:11). If the church did not need teachers, then God would not have given them to her. Therefore, if the pastors and teachers do not teach the truth, then the people of God will not receive the truth and cannot therefore believe the truth. Granted, in all fellowships, there will be some men with greater insight, ability and perseverance than others. And when these men encounter various errors, they like the Bereans, will search the Scriptures, discover the truth and depart from churches with less than correct doctrine; but not always. Often men remain in churches with less than optimal doctrine because of other factors. Most people trust that their pastor will teach them the truth, and therefore will believe what they are taught. And if they are taught error, then they will believe error because they know nothing else. Apollos is an example of this dynamic to a certain extent. He believed the gospel and taught it. But Pricilla and Aquilla had to straighten him out on some issues. His doctrine was good, in so far as it went, but not perfect. He needed someone to teach him in order to improve his doctrine.

Secondly, in modern culture, the church presently suffers from what sociologists call pluralization; i.e., the problems resulting from a multitude of options. Any given community will offer Christians a wide variety of churches, worship services, fellowship opportunities and doctrinal standards. Many of these churches will deliberately tailor their programs, emphasizes, etc., specifically to attract certain kinds of people. Since we live in an anti-intellectual age, deeply influenced by pietism, the average Christian is NOT primarily motivated by the search for truth, but for a warm, intimate relationship with God and a comfortable social environment. It is only “natural” then for Christians to seek out those churches that make them feel comfortable and provide them that experience.

It can be hypothesized that certain personality types will tend to gather at churches comprised of similar personality types simply because they “feel” more comfortable there. This assumption may seldom be verbalized, or even recognized, but it is a factor never the less. For example some people are drawn to “traditional” churches; others may seek out “activist” churches, while still a third will desire more “emotional” fellowships. Over time, there may well be a “sorting” effect where various personality types join like-minded churches thus affecting the very complexion of the church or denomination.

Is it just an “accident” that Baptists are renowned for being evangelistically oriented while Presbyterians are known as the “Frozen Chosen?” Is it just a coincidence that Pentecostals and Charismatics place a great deal of emphasis on emotions? In other words, it is NOT necessarily the doctrine that makes the people, but rather the personalities of the people that are attracted to certain kinds of doctrines. The Scriptures warned that this would be a problem wherein men would gather teachers to themselves who would tickle their ears (cf. 2 Tim 4:4). But it does not necessarily follow that all men everywhere would necessarily choose evil teachers. Christians just might choose teachers who make them “feel” comfortable, who emphasize certain doctrines, and ignore others.

This perspective can be verified by noting that Church membership in America is directly related to social class. The higher the socio-economic ladder one climbs, the more one tends to be drawn to specific denominational affiliation (e.g., Episcopalians are mostly comprised of the top 2% of the population followed by Presbyterians, Methodists and Baptists. Charismatics and Pentecostals, in general, tend to be made up of the poor and working class in American culture.).

Hence, doctrinal divisions may have more to do with social class, then genuine theological convictions. It may not be an accident that the best-educated segments of society are largely drawn to churches with the best-developed doctrinal systems. Furthermore it is significant that the higher one’s socio-economic status, the less appropriate are overt displays of emotion. Thus, those who come from poor or working class backgrounds are not only more comfortable, but may actively seek out churches where emotions, not intellect are more highly valued. Since emotion and experience, rather than academics are valued, such churches are more likely to adopt, permit or even encourage doctrinal error. It also works the other way. Historically, it can be argued that Presbyterian churches were so enthralled by impeccable academic credentials that they STILL insist on their seminary professors having degrees from prestigious secular universities, even though this led directly to theological liberalism and apostasy.

Now granted, this tendency is a general rule, with many notable exceptions. But if this analysis holds up, it does help to explain WHY there exist such differences in doctrine between various evangelical Christians in American culture today. The plurality of churches allows believers of similar temperament and values to gather together in places where they feel comfortable because experience, not doctrine is considered the essence of the Christian life. The pastors and teachers are never exposed to a more structured and consistently Biblical doctrine because it is not deemed necessary to their ministries. Since one cannot teach what one does not know, the average Christian is seldom given the opportunity or the motivation to develop a better theological understanding of the Scriptures.

Toleration

Whether we like it or not, approve of it or not, or accept it or not, doctrinal differences exist and not all those differences are heresy, or even necessarily harmful. Romans fourteen is clear that there are some issues that each individual must decide before God for himself, being “convinced in his own mind.” No one else can judge their conscience in these matters. In New Testament times, with a mixed church of Jews and Gentiles, the matter of food was crucial. Some could not in good conscience eat meat sacrificed to idols. Others could and did. The Apostle Paul was very clear that no one should judge another on something like this. Though some knew that food sacrificed to idols was harmless, others did not have this same understanding. If they ate, their consciences would be defiled and they would have been in sin.

It is significant to note that Paul does NOT rebuke the “weaker” brother for not having better theology. Instead, he warns the “stronger” brother not to allow something as mundane as food to become a cause of division. It would appear then that God is more gracious towards us, even in our error, than we are often towards one another.

Hence the Scriptures allow a degree of tolerance on some issues that some of us today would find difficult to accept. Tolerance can of course become an excuse for intellectual laziness or even an abandonment of ultimate truth. But perhaps we should consider the issue of “tolerance” from an engineering perspective. For an engineer, “tolerance” has to do with how closely two things have to fit together to operate acceptably. An example of this is the old Colt 1911 semi-automatic pistol. Developed to counter the drug induced charges of the Moro guerillas in the Philippines, the U.S. Army needed a hard hitting, and reliable side-arm for its officers (the men had rifles, the officers had only pistols. Reports had some officers shooting guerillas six times with their .38 revolvers and still being killed by their machete wielding attackers).

The original 1911 had extremely sloppy tolerances (some old timers insisted that if you held it up to the sun, you could actually see daylight through parts of it). However, the loose tolerances allowed the 1911 to operate even in the harshest environments. It did not jam easily. Even in wet, muddy, jungle conditions, it continued to function reliably. It was NOT the most accurate handgun in the world, but it was a reliable one.

Though replaced by the Beretta 92, the Colt 1911 is still a popular handgun and widely used in shooting competitions. However, to increase accuracy, the TOLERANCES have been significantly tightened. Special tighter barrels, bushings and slides have all been designed to increase accuracy out to literally 100 yards. But the push for accuracy and the tighter tolerances makes the gun less inherently reliable. It jams more easily, requiring barrels to be throated and polished to feed ammunition reliably. It must be cleaned regularly and lubricated properly. In many respects, a custom-built 1911 is the finest handgun in the world, just don’t get it dirty. And all the work needed is too expensive for the casual shooter.

In many respects, this aspect of “tolerance” illustrates the problem facing the church. Yes, increased accuracy is desirable, but it comes at a cost that at this point in time, in this stage of the sovereign work of God in history, that the average Christian is not willing or able to pay. There does appear to be in Scripture an acceptable degree of “tolerance” (in the engineering use of the term) that we are expected to deal with.

In the past two thousand years, we have made great strides in developing a comprehensive understanding of the Scriptures. There is no doubt that the high-water mark of Christian theology was the Reformation and the great Reformation creeds. But the reality is that some of the brethren (and let us be honest here, at the present time, MOST of the brethren) no longer share that understanding. Baptists and Methodists combined, at the time of the American War of Independence made up less than 10% of the population. Now, Reformed churches of ALL stripes probably make up less than 10% of just the Christian population. As a consequence, large segments of broad evangelicalism now hold to some form of Dispensationalism, Arminianism or Pentecostalism. Now ANY error is serious and has repercussions on every aspect of the Faith. A strong case can be made that the church militant has largely lost the battle for Western culture as a direct result of embracing these errors.

Yet it is no good saying they “ought” to know better, because the reality is, they “don’t” know any better and it does not look as if they will learn better any time soon. Broad evangelicals profess their faith in Christ, baptize in His name, build churches to his glory, and do the work of the ministry. Even in Reformed churches, surveys will show that a significant number of their members were brought to faith in Christ through various broad evangelical churches or ministries. Obviously, from our perspective, they could do all these things BETTER if they had better doctrine. But only the worst sort of sectarian nonsense would deny that God is at work in broad evangelical churches.

Hence tolerance in this sense is not simply leveling the playing field where all doctrines are reduced to the lowest common denominator, but rather the recognition that God in His grace uses ALL of His people to bring about His will, despite all OUR error and sin. There are no perfect people, no perfect churches and no one with perfect doctrine, but God uses all just the same. Hence even as we encourage our brother to develop a better and more consistent understanding of the Scriptures, we ought also be aware of the fact that God is using them. Furthermore, occasionally, there just may be things that He is doing through them that He is NOT doing through us and we might actually be able to learn something from them.

Liberty of Conscience

The great Reformation creeds define liberty of conscience as freedom from the commandments of men that are contrary to the Word of God, or beside it (WCF 20:2). God alone has the authority to bind our conscience and require our faith and obedience. Furthermore, the Word of God is NOT absolutely clear on all points in all places. The doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture says that all things necessary for God’s glory, man’s salvation, faith and life are expressly set forth in Scripture or discovered by good and necessary consequences (WCF 1:6). But still the illumination of the Holy Spirit is required for men to understand these things. Even the Apostle Peter says that the Apostle Paul wrote many things, “difficult to understand” (2 Peter 3:16). Thus not all men have the same measure of illumination. Not all men have the same degree of understanding. And not all men agree to what is a “good and necessary consequence.”

Therefore at the end of the day, Christians have to realize that not all differences are heresy. There needs to be grace given to another, who may not yet have attained our degree of doctrinal accuracy. In this life, they may NEVER achieve our desired level of understanding. Brothers MAY sincerely disagree with each other on certain issues; and God may be more concerned with how we handle the disagreement, then with who was right and who was wrong.

Like iron sharpening iron (Pvbs 27:17), so we ought to strive to encourage, exhort and admonish each other to arrive at a better, deeper, more comprehensive understanding of the Word (Col 3:16). Hence we ought not to judge, but to serve one another, trusting that each man stands accountable before God for his labor (Rms 14:4). We do not have to give up on the truth and accuracy of doctrine to realize that God is truly present in another church, or believer, that He is working in them and through them according to His divine plan.

The challenge of course is for those who DO have a better understanding of the faith to bring their brothers along without the arrogant and contemptuous attitude to often too common among some Reformed churches. If we have the truth (as we sincerely believe we do) then let us demonstrate that truth by loving and serving our brothers. The Chalcedon Foundation has come under criticism occasionally from other Reformed ministries because of its willingness to teach Charismatics. We speak at their churches, teach at their conferences and occasionally even train some of their pastors. As a result, there are increasing numbers of Charismatic churches that have adopted a more consistently Biblical worldview. No, they probably will not be applying to the OPC any time soon for membership. But they have discovered the doctrines or grace, they have come to love the Law of God as the expression of His unchangeable nature, they have adopted an optimistic eschatology and are willing to apply their faith in their work, community, nation etc.

Jesus said that the mark of greatness in the Kingdom is being the servant of all (e.g., Mark 10:45). To serve requires humility and grace. A love for truth does not require contempt for those who do not yet know, as we think they ought to know. But reformed Christians in particular would do well to remember that love and truth are NEVER to be pitted against one another (cf. 1 Cor 8:1). If we truly have the truth, then it ought to be demonstrated by grace and peace and a dedication to winning our errant brothers, not condemning them or judging them. Therefore let us exhort, admonish, encourage and teach our brothers, demonstrating by the grace of our speech, the purity of our love and the sacrifice of our labors that the truth of God is with us. For in so doing, the ancient church conquered the world in the name of King Jesus. And in so doing, will we achieve victory over the nations.

_____________________

Winning Arguments and Losing Friends; Proverbs on Resolving Conflicts

At first, one might ask what “Conflict Resolution” has to do with the issue of “authority.” The original version of this essay was written over a decade ago to help some brothers who were in conflict with various authorities. We started from some general principles and then as the essay went on, specifically applied them to various real world situations. If you disagree with your authority on any issue, you have a conflict; now the issue is how you resolve it!

Conflicts have been eating at the Christian Church since the time of the Lord Jesus (remember John and James angling for power?). None of us have yet been perfected; all of us will sin against God and each other. Thus conflicts are inevitable. Ideally, impartial church courts, governed by wise and compassionate elders, ought to help us resolve conflicts appropriately. Sadly, not all of us have good churches. Sadly, not all good churches have good elders. Even the best churches with the best elders can make bad decisions. Ultimately each of us is responsible to God for how we live our lives. His word clearly tells us how to live wisely, justly, kindly and in peace. Self-governed men must take personal responsibility for studying the Scriptures and working to apply them in daily life.

The following principles from the book of Proverbs are offered as a primer on resolving conflicts Biblically. The issue is not so much that conflicts occur, but whether we handle them according to God’s commands.

Winning at the Cost of a Relationship

First, whenever in a conflict situation, we need to remember Proverbs 28:26; “He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, but he who walks wisely will be delivered.” Our hearts are deceitful and desperately wicked (Jer 17:9). There is a “natural” tendency to blame others for the problem (going all the way back to Adam in the garden). Some of us seem to have a pathological need to be right and use every trick in the lawyer’s handbook to convince ourselves and others that “I’ve been wronged!” We can always find reasons, excuses, and rational-izations to justify our actions; and why someone else’s was “wrong.” Proverbs 21:2 “Every man’s way is right in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the hearts.” Just because we are sincerely convinced that we are right, does not necessarily mean that we are.

Often, the situation may not be as clear cut as we think it is. Over the years, I have spent many, many hours mediating disputes between Christians. I have learned the hard way that when two people have a conflict, part of the problem is almost always that neither side really understood what the other was saying. Both may have made unwarranted assumptions about what the other side intended, or read too much into something. Neither may have understood what the other person actually said or put the worst possible interpretation on their actions.

Life is often far more complicated than most of us appreciate; issues are not always clear cut. Usually, Christians have (at least in their own minds), “good” intentions behind whatever they said or did that led to a conflict. Proverbs 18:17 says, “The first to plead his case seems just until another comes and examines him.” Therefore, rather than getting upset with others and wanting to prove ourselves right and them wrong, we all need to exercise a little humility, a little kindness, a little patience. We can often defuse a situation before it blows up into a disaster. But if our primary motivation is to be “right” and we hate to be corrected, then we are setting ourselves up for judgment; “Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge but he who hates reproof is stupid (Proverbs 12:1).”

Hence we need to ask ourselves, “Is being ‘right’ really all that important?” What benefit to win an argument here, only to be judged by God in eternity? And what folly to lose God’s blessing by being right, but in the wrong way, with the wrong attitude (1 Cor 8:1ff)? Therefore Christians need to develop a gentle and contrite heart, open to correction from others, lest we harden ourselves to the Spirit’s conviction. Isaiah 66:2 says “But to this one I will look, to him who is humble and contrite of spirit, and who trembles at My word.”

So if we cannot trust our own heart, what do we do? “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes but a wise man is he who listens to counsel (Proverbs 12:15). We need to seek out wisdom by asking others for counsel. This does not mean trying to get other people on our side; and it certainly is not a loophole for gossip. Again, that wicked and deceitful heart can lead us to seeking out people who will agree with us rather than actually lovingly tell us the truth. For what it is worth, I think the primary duty of elder is to adjudicate problems, showing believers how the unchanging principles of God’s Moral Law applies to their specific problems, concerns and conflicts. Therefore, the godly man will join a church with wise elders, and then seek their counsel when he has a problem.

Kindness and Truth are not Opposed

A second principle of resolving conflicts biblically comes from Proverbs 3:3 “Do not let kindness and truth leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. So you will find favor and good repute in the sight of God and man.” Both kindness and truth are important. The two go together. Sadly in this age when truth is so regularly compromised, Christians tend to be either “kind” or “truthful.” This is an unbiblical dichotomy. Kindness is the setting by which the beauty of truth is displayed. Proverbs 25:11-12 “Like apples of gold in settings of silver is a word spoken in right circumstances. Like an earring of gold and an ornament of fine gold is a wise reprover to a listening ear.” Notice the result, “favor and good repute.” Sometimes, when we run into opposition, especially when standing for the truth, the cause might not have been the truth, but our lack of kindness. We’re right, we know we’re right and we darn well want everyone else to know we’re right! And we don’t care what effect that has on others.

Sometimes, perhaps it is not our stand that gets us into trouble, but the lack of kindness in the way we take that stand. There is an unholy delight that comes from being right and proving others wrong; Paul discusses this temptation in 1 Corinthians 8:1ff. However, if someone knows that our intention is to love them, support them, assist them, come along side and help them, if we have demonstrated repeatedly a humble spirit in our relations with them by serving them (Mark 10:45) and putting their interests before our own (Phil 2:1ff), then they are more likely to receive correction. There is never an excuse for being bitter, scathing, short tempered, harsh or nasty with each other. It’s sin.

But what happens if we do everything right and the other person still won’t listen? Proverbs 9:7-9 says “He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself, and he who reproves a wicked man gets insults for himself. Do not reprove a scoffer, lest he hate you, reprove a wise man, and he will love you. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser, teach a righteous man, and he will increase his learning.” If we won’t take criticism or correction we are fools, pure and simple. Yet all of us know too many “Christians” who cannot handle criticism on any level. And often, the worst offenders are our leaders. You know the sort, they fly into a rage if questioned and they intimidate everyone around them. They effectively isolate themselves from any kind of reproof. But since we value their gifts more than their character, we continue to support them, encourage them and work for them. Which is worse, being a fool, or following one?

Stop Digging Yourself Further into the Hole

A third principle from Proverbs is found in 10:19 says “When there are many words, transgression is unavoidable, but he who restrains his lips is wise.” In a conflict, many of us desperately want to state our case as loudly and as often (and to as many people) as we can. Sometimes, we need to learn how to stay quiet. Proverbs 17:28 says “Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is counted prudent.” (The humanistic parallel is “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then open one’s mouth and remove all doubt”). The more we open our moth speak the more opportunity we have to put a foot firmly in it. Instead of stating our case (or rehashing it in our minds) we need to learn how to listen. God may be trying to tell us something; but you can’t listen, if you’re talking.

This is especially important when the conflict is between us and one of God’s authorities. Remember Peter’s instructions to wives on how to win disobedient husbands (1 Ptr 3:1ff)? Since she is in a subordinate position, sometimes a wife’s only weapon is trust in the sovereignty of God. Knowing when not to say something may be as important as what to say. Sometimes an authority (i.e., a pastor, elder, husband, parent, boss, etc.) is dead wrong. Restraining the lips, biting back that critical word and letting the authority find out for himself that he was wrong, is sometimes the only option. It is not a matter of peace at any price, but the acknowledgment that God is sovereign. In submitting to our authorities, it is our duty to bring sin and failure to their attention. But sometimes, rather than a direct rebuke, a searching question might be the better tactic, giving them an opportunity to find out for themselves they are wrong.

Proverbs 25:15 says “By forbearance a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue breaks the bone.” There are definite tactics required when confronting authority. A direct, head to head knock down argument is seldom appropriate. (I know; someone is going to bring up the example of Nathan and David. OK, when God anoints you as a prophet and gives you direct, special revelation, then you too can go head to head with the King.) God demands respect for those He has placed in authority over us. The Apostle Paul apologized for speaking badly of the High Priest, even though the he had been unlawfully beaten (Acts 23:1-5)!

Gossips Destroy Relationships

Many Christians though will not directly confront authority (or anyone else). Instead, they violate Proverbs 11:13, “He who goes about as a talebearer reveals secrets, but he who is trustworthy conceals a matter.” Often when some of us have a complaint against another, the first thing we do is try to recruit others. We want the approval of men rather than God. And therefore we reveal secrets. We bear tales. We talk to anyone and everyone about the problem (except the people actually involved). We get on the phone to tell everyone how badly we have been treated. Maybe we write letters and send them to the entire congregation. Perhaps we even set up web-sites where we try to make our case to the world! Congratulations! You have just become a gossip; the kind of person condemned in the strongest possible language in Scripture associated with murderers, sodomites and apostates!

Here’s a simple life principle: if you want to get people really mad at you so that reconciliation becomes almost impossible, then make their mistakes public or talk behind their backs. Not only does this make it harder for others to acknowledge their error, but like cancer, it spreads frustration, anger and bitterness throughout the body. Proverbs 25:23 “The north wind brings forth rain, and a backbiting tongue, an angry countenance.” There is a cause and effect relationship here. The more people gossip, the more discord and animosity are spread. But some people do not seem to care what damage they cause to anyone; they think they have been wronged and they will get even!

Worse yet, many of us listen to these wicked people. We forget Proverbs 18:17 “The first to plead his case seems just, until another comes and examines him.” We take an unholy delight in hearing bad things about others and then develop a negative predisposition before we have heard the facts. A minor problem soon escalates into a major conflict. Families are divided, fellowship broken, good churches ruined, all because we wanted to hear some juicy gossip about another! I admit to a certain degree of personal frustration here; I have seen entire Presbyteries adjudicate a conflict based on nothing more than rumor and gossip. I have the documents in my own case files where one man would make a false accusation to some elders, who did not rebuke him for gossip, but rather received and believed the report and then started a chain of events that destroyed innocent men. I have emails and personal correspondence from people all over the world who ask me to take a stand on some conflict they have with others; they do not want my counsel – just my support for their “side” of the issue.

Instead of complaining about another, Proverbs 13:3 requires “The one who guards his mouth preserves his life; the one who opens wide his lips comes to ruin.” Too many Christians go at each other like cannibalistic piranhas over the silliest issues. But why not just let some things go? OK, your brother offended you. He sinned. Surprise, surprise, he’s a sinner saved by grace, just like you. Is the issue worth getting upset, angry, gossiping about, etc.? Proverbs 17:9 is appropriate here: “He who covers a transgression seeks love, but he who repeats a matter separates intimate friends.” In the grand scheme of God’s omnipotent plan, is this something that’s really important? Every conflict involves a cost and we need to learn how to “pick the hill carefully you want to die on.” Discretion says that not every battle needs be fought at this time, at this place. Grace is allowing God to work on someone, at His time. Love is not breaking fellowship over pride or hurt feelings. And it’s time to start calling this kind of backbiting foolishness just what it is, sin, and God’s people must repent of it.

Proverbs 21:23 “He who guards his mouth and his tongue, guards his soul from troubles.” But there are some brothers, God bless ‘em, who seem to take a positive delight in being cantankerous, critical and nasty. They’re looking for an excuse to fight with someone, anyone, over anything! And often (too often) the more solidly “Reformed” they are, the more unpleasant they are to be around. They have this wonderful tool called “Reformed Theology” and they just don’t know what to do with it. They’re like a little boy with a hatchet, chopping up the furniture because it’s so much fun to see things go “splinter!” Likewise, we end up cutting each other up, as the world goes to hell around us. No wonder the Christian church is ridiculed. We so often act ridiculous!

A Gentle Answer

Proverbs 15:1-2 “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger. The tongue of the wise makes knowledge acceptable, but the mouth of fools spouts folly.” Here, is the solution to 95% of conflict and confrontation problems between believers. If we could just learn how to speak gently with each other, we could resolve most problems before pride and arrogance blows them up into major conflicts. If instead of coming out with that snapping, biting word, and instead, learn to keep our voice calm, our words sweet, our attitude humble, most conflicts would die on the vine, and even the most recalcitrant won. But we allow our anger to feed on the other’s, which feeds on ours which feeds on their’s… ad nauseam. Proverbs 30:33 says, “For the churning of milk produces butter, and pressing the nose brings forth blood; so the churning of anger produces strife.” Christians need to learn how to stop the spiral. Some of us still use school yard ethics, “but he hit me first” and think we are justified in hitting back. But God says, “Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead…” (1 Ptr 3:9). Anger is a motivational emotion God gives us to resolve a problem. It is not an excuse for strife. Our task is always to speak that which builds up, never to tear down (Eph 4:28-29).

A gentle answer is one that respects the other, that comes from a humble heart, that believes in another and will not “receive a bad report” about them. It is the manner we project and the words we use that determines whether anger is stirred up, or wrath is turned away. Expressions of affection and respect in a gentle and kind tone, will do much to make one’s rebuke acceptable. This principle works, even if we don’t get it exactly right! I remember once having an almost violent conflict with my boss at the time, a Christian leader well known for his “firm” manner. While I no longer remember what we were arguing about (except that I am sure I was right and he was wrong!), I do recall thinking it was just about time to step outside and roll up the shirt sleeves, when Proverbs 15:1-2 came to mind. I was so angry, I was still shouting when I said, “I love you like a father and I deeply appreciate all the years of friendship and guidance you’ve given me and you’re my boss and I’ll darn well shut up now and do what you say.” The silence that followed my bellow, lasted an eternity. I then noticed my brother’s cheeks getting wet. After that I didn’t see so well (must have gotten something in my eyes or something). We ended up hugging, expressing respect and love for each other. Giving a gentle answer (even in a less than gentle way!) was enough to break through the conflict so that we could talk reasonably.

Learning How to Persuade

Proverbs 16:23-24 says, “The heart of the wise teaches his mouth, and adds persuasiveness to his lips. Pleasant words are a honeycomb, sweet to the soul and healing to the bones.” The sweetness here is defined as pleasant words which heal. The purpose of confrontation is always to bring about healing, rather than just condemnation (or to demonstrate that we are right), (Gal 6:1ff). Therefore no matter how badly our brothers have blown it, we have a duty to make it as easy for them as we can, to repent of their error and get back on track.

Make Sure You Have ALL the Facts

Proverbs 18:13 says, “He who gives an answer before he hears, it is folly and shame to him.” I paraphrase this as “Did you get all the facts before you tore them to pieces?” And the application is simple, before condemning, ask questions. I am amazed at how often Christians fight over such stupid things. But even more amazing is the tendency to fight even when they are agreed! But because they are more interested in opening their mouths rather than their ears, they fail to understand what the other person was really saying. Seriously! In counseling cases, I’ve often seen people scream at each other, and they were both saying the same thing! (Of course, both were rebuked, firmly, for shouting). James 1:19-20 is clear, we need to be slow to speak and slower to anger. The anger of men does not accomplish the righteousness of God.

Stiff Necks will be Broken

Finally, Proverbs 29:1 needs to be remembered: “A man who hardens his neck after much reproof will suddenly be broken beyond remedy.” Some Christians just do not get it. Though a quick wit, an acerbic tongue and a condescending attitude may win arguments, they break fellowship. Often God disciplines such people with emotional, physical and even financial pain. But some people will not listen. And eventually, God will judge them, their families, their churches and their ministries.

I firmly believe that in every conflict situation, no matter what the issue, God is primarily concerned with developing within us the character of Christ (Rms 8:28-29). He could build His kingdom very nicely without us, but He is building His Kingdom through building the character of His people (1 Ptr 2:4-5). Thus in His sovereignty, He often places us in positions where our sins are exposed and we are given constant opportunities to develop into the image of His Son. Furthermore, it is through our weakness that His glory is magnified (1 Cor 1:26-31). But until we can apply the Law in the little things in life, God will never entrust us with the greater things.

_____________________

Forgiveness

(Both those in authority as well as those under authority are going to sin against each other; therefore everyone needs to be reminded of how God expects us to deal with offences. Both tyranny and rebellion break covenant relationships. The doctrine of forgiveness is what allows those relationships to be healed and restored…)

Perhaps the one fundamental fact that all Christians, regardless of their other doctrinal differences can agree on, is that we are all sinners, saved by the grace and mercy of God. Furthermore, though saved from sin, we still sin, failing our Lord (and each other) every day, in thought, word and deed. And, in sinning against God, we often sin against one another.

Yet how do most Christians respond when someone upsets them? Many act shocked, outraged that someone would dare say or do something that offends them. At least this is what one must conclude after listening to the long litany of whines, moans, and complaints characteristic of the average Christian. Sure, the offense hurts, but much of the sting can be taken away if we understand and are already convinced of this esoteric spiritual truth: “sinners, sin.” Did you get that? Sinners sin. They sin against God, and they sin against each other. And we are all sinners saved by grace. And though we ought to expect growth, development and maturity in the Christian life, every single Christian is going to fall short of His glory and fail Him and each other regularly.

The issue is not so much that all sin but rather, how do we handle sin when it occurs? Sadly, this oh so basic question is seldom asked and even less frequently answered. Yes many churches pray it every week in the Lord’s Prayer. The answer to sin is forgiveness. But all one has to do is look at the average church and to see fractured relationships, bruised egos and deeply rooted bitterness to discover that most Christians do not understand or practice the concept of forgiveness.

Defining the Terms:

The Bible uses several Greek words that we translate as “forgive.” The word “aphimi” means “to send away” with the idea of not only remitting the punishment but the cause of the offense as well. Hence forgiveness has the idea that someone owes you a debt, and you don’t require them to pay it. You even go so far as to forget the cause of the debt as well. Here is the root difficulty most people have forgiving others. You see, we do not want to remit the penalty. To the contrary, we want vengeance. We want to get our own back. It is only “natural” to want to do unto others, what they just did to you.

But our model of behavior is not the twisted values of this cursed world, bur rather the unchangeable nature and character of God Almighty Himself. We have to forgive, because as new creations (2 Cor 5:17) being conformed into the image of Christ (Rms 8:29) we must put off the old way of doing things (Eph 4:19ff) and learn to act like God (1 Cor 11:1). Since He has forgiven us for our sins against Him, we have to forgive others for their sins against us!

Another Greek word (charidzomai) means to bestow a favor unconditionally. When someone has wronged us, it is grace (unmerited favor) that allows us to forgive them. Just as God in Christ has forgiven us, we also forgive others. Notice that neither Greek word says anything about ignoring the very real costs of an offense. Forgiveness is not saying, “Hey, it was no big deal.” To the contrary, the terms almost require us to recognize that someone owes us a debt. But the focus is not the debt, but our response to it and that makes all the difference in how we handle it.

Forgiveness therefore is a self-conscious decision not to hold an offense against another in our attitudes, thoughts, actions, words, and thus emotions. The objective basis for forgiving others is that we ourselves have been forgiven in Christ. And just as we must be humble before God, acknowledge our guilt and ask for his forgiveness, we also need to practice being humble towards one another. Perhaps the seven hardest words in the English language are: “I have been wrong, please forgive me.” Yet these words hold the key to rebuilding relationships, restoring fellowship, edifying our brother and preserving the unity of the family, friendships and the church. But what are these things to keeping our pride intact, our stiff necks proudly unbowed, our churches divided, our families broken and our friendships shattered!

Just as it is difficult to ask for forgiveness, some of us find it nearly impossible to give it, even though we know full well that God demands it. There is some nasty tendency in some of us to cling onto grievances like a maladjusted child with a thumb in his mouth and a grubby blanket gripped tightly in his hands. Some of us seem to like holding onto pain, worrying old injuries like that same child picking at a scab.

Many people come in for counseling who have been grievously wronged by someone. Sometimes it is someone very close, so the wound is even more painful. Often when I tell them that they must forgive, they respond, “Oh, I can forgive, but I can never forget.” Well, they never forget because they have never forgiven. The human mind is an amazing thing. God has so arranged it that if we do not keep constantly picking at something, the molecule strings that make up memory become weaker and weaker over time. One of the tricks to a good memory is constant review; the more you go over something, the fresher and more real it is to you. Hence, when someone constantly rehashes old wounds, injuries, hurts and complaints, it can form a molecular chain so strong that the event controls our lives. But forgiveness basically says, “I will not bring up this issue again, either to the offender, to others, to God or myself.” It is that commitment that actually breaks the hold that painful wrongs have over us.

Forgiveness requires letting go of the pain. It is a wonderful thing indeed when someone who has injured us comes and makes restitution. But sometimes, that is not going to happen. Sometimes they will not repent. Sometimes, they can’t (for example, they may have died). But we can still cling on to the pain. In this case, love covers a multitude of transgressions and when the memory and pain returns, we simply say, “that has been forgiven.” We tell ourselves every time the Adversary brings it up, “but that has been forgiven.” We replace the pain of an offense with the truth of God’s Word and eventually, the love of God covers that transgression and the pain will go away.

Forgiveness requires a positive attitude toward the offense rather than a negative attitude toward the offender. God is sovereign. He is in control. And as a good friend of mine says, “God is more concerned about your character, than your comfort.” Each and every injury done to us can become a tool in God’s hands to conform us into the image of Christ (cf. Rms 8:29) if we will see it that way. There will come a time, when every wrong will be righted, when every tear shall be dried, when the pains and turmoil caused by our sin will fade away. The future belongs to God’s elect. And therefore we can say with confidence, “While I don’t know why God allowed this painful thing to happen, I do know that He can only do what is right. Therefore I can praise Him, and obey Him, and trust that He will work it all out in the end.”

Forgiveness Is A Non-Optional Principle

You see, we had better develop just that attitude towards offenses, because we have no other choice. God demands forgiveness. It is “non-optional.” It is part and parcel of the salvation that Christ purchased for is. We must forgive because it is commanded (Lk 17:3 Eph 4:32, Col 3:13). Once we hold an offense, then God has an offense against us because we are disobeying His explicit command.

Furthermore, we must forgive because we are commanded to put other’s interests before our own (Phil 2:2ff). The Christian life is not lived in isolation. We are a part of the body, and a body that wars against itself is sick and diseased. God’s solution is that just as Christ laid aside His glory and dwelt among us to serve us, so also are we to lay aside our own glory and seek to serve one another. We do not have to look out for our own personal interests (Phil 2:4), God will take care of those. We are commanded to imitate Christ and serve each other’s best. Therefore, as God in Christ has forgiven us, we in Christ MUST forgive one another.

Granted, there are cases where men sin against us, and out of love for Him and them we confront their sin so that we might restore them. But do you see the difference in confronting sin so that our brother may be granted repentance and be restored and holding on to a injury because it offends our dignity? The one is done for the glory of God and the edification of our brother. The other is to salvage our own pride.

If we do not forgive, then eventually bitterness will set in. Bitterness is a sin that not only destroys the soul, but has serious physical consequences as well. Secular research demonstrates that bitter people suffer terrible physical trauma; i.e., chemical imbalances in the brain that can cause bizarre behavior, sleep deprivation that wears out the body and allows toxins to build up, and lead directly to psycho-physiological disorders such as colitis, ulcers, high blood pressure skin disease headaches, back pains, cancer, heart disease etc. It just ain’t healthy not to forgive!

As if the physical problems were not bad enough, lack of forgiveness and bitterness ruins our spiritual lives as well. The apostle John is clear, if you don’t love your brother, then you don’t love God (1 Jn 4:20). Give all the money you want, attend all the church services you like, polish your doctrine until it is theologically impeccable, but if you do not forgive others, if you hold bitterness, anger and malice towards others, then God says, in reality, you don’t love Him. And if we regard iniquity in our heart, then God says, He will not hear us (Psa 66:18).

Many people who come to me with doubts about their relationship to God often suffer a lack of assurance because of the bitterness and lack of forgiveness they have towards others. Sometimes the injuries are real, sometimes they are just thin skinned. Regardless, they hold onto the hurt and focus on how badly they were wronged. As a result, God never seemed so far away, they get nothing from the Scriptures, prayer is a dry, dull ritual, and worship like chewing mud. They are separated from God because they are separated from each other.

The simple fundamental fact is that we must forgive because otherwise we will not be forgiven (Matt 6:15). How dare we hold an offense against another, when God in Christ has forgiven us? Do we not understand the very parable given on this issue? No offense on earth can begin to compare with the unholy wickedness that is the human heart before a holy God. Yet God, loved us so much, that Christ died for us. We did not deserve it, we cannot earn it, but God graciously gives forgiveness to His elect. Therefore, for someone to claim the name of Christ, and yet arrogantly say that he will not forgive is actually to say that “My standards are higher than God’s. My rights are more important. I have been wounded more.” This is blasphemy! And if someone does not repent of his lack of forgiveness, his hard heart and arrogant pride, then he demonstrates that he does not have the Spirit of Christ.

How to Forgive Others

Since forgiveness is so vital to every aspect of the Christian life, it is crucial that we learn how to develop right attitudes about offenses. At the risk of being repetitious, we have got to understand the sovereignty of God. God is working through the actions of the offender. No matter what their intention might have been, God was there. He did not go on vacation, he was not side tracked by another issue because you were not important to His plan. To the contrary, the doctrine of the immensity of God says that He fills every point of space with His entire being. When you were being wounded, God was there. Yes, He could have prevented the hurt, if He had so desired. But God chooses to suffering as a divine tool (cf. 1 Ptr 4:12). Rather than rail against the offender, or against God, we need to see that God is working on us in every situation, but especially during the most difficult ones, doing deep heart surgery. And yes, that surgery is painful, and the recuperation time might be long. But ultimately and finally, if we submit ourselves to His grace and trust in His beneficence, He will heal and restore us.

Will we always know why we suffer? No, not always. But then it becomes an issue of trust. Is God our father? Is He sovereign? Does He have our best in mind? Do we want to be vessels by which He is glorified? Let us never forget that to a certain degree, the pagan Roman Empire was won to Christ as the martyrs marched into the arena singing His praises.

Therefore, bitterness is not an option. If we are embittered by the wrongs we suffer from others, we are in effect, blaming God. We ought to be willing to suffer for doing right (1 Ptr 2:19) and in so doing, we have the strength of Christ to forgive, even as we are forgiven.

Secondly, we need to develop right responses when offended. It is not mindless pietism to thank God in faith for His sovereignty for whatever happens in life. We all know Romans 8:28, and the “all things” certainly includes the slight, the harsh word, the betrayal of trust, or whatever it was that offended us. We need to remind ourselves that EVEN THIS will work out for good according the God’s providence. It is not our responsibility to know what the good is, just to trust in God that He will do what He has said He will do.

It is never inappropriate for us to try and discern what character traits God is trying to build in us through hurtful situations. God is working on our character, and usually the offense that hurts the most, is right where we need character work the most. Hence, offensives must be seen as opportunities. God wants us to develop the character of Christ (Rms 8:29) and here is one more opportunity He has given us to do exactly that! We must learn to say, “Lord you are sovereign, you allowed this to happen, what do you want me to learn, what Christ-like character trait to develop, what sin to forsake?” If nothing else, let the pain of an offense drive us deeper into God’s arms, in child-like trust that our Heavenly Father can and will make all things better.

A fundamental Biblical principle, almost universally violated in dealing with offenses and forgiveness is found in 1 Ptr 5:9 “do not return evil for evil or insult for insult, but give a blessing instead.” Their sin is never justification for similar sin on our part. Yet usually, when someone sins against us, we then feel justified sinning in return. Hence, when someone shouts at us, we shout back. If someone insults us, we feel justified in insulting back. If others hurt us, then the gloves are off and we think we can hurt back. However, in God’s economy, His elect are commanded to respond to people in certain ways. We must not return evil for evil. When we are insulted, we give a blessing instead. We are controlled, not by our emotions, but the Spirit of God.

And one of the wonderful, unexpected side benefits of obedience here is that our conscience is then clear to do both do and feel as we ought. Psychologists have long noted a relationship between what we say and do, and the emotional effects it has on us. Attitudes follow actions. If we do what is right, our feelings will come into line. Therefore, before a conflict, argument, spat, or disagreement becomes convoluted with sin, by simply refusing to return evil for evil, but instead giving the other person a blessing, we guard our own hearts from allowing bitterness, anger and malice to grow.

Fourthly, we need to make sure that we have a clean conscience by being willing to assume responsibility for our own sin ( ). Let us be honest, none of us is ever 100% right. Even if the other person was 95% wrong, we still must take the responsibility for our 5%. When we are right before God, we can then go with the right spirit and right attitude to our brother. This has the advantage of breaking down barriers. Vulnerability is often hard to achieve in human relations, yet is essential for developing intimacy. By acknowledging our own guilt, it helps to bring our brother to repentance. True, there are some people so hard hearted, so ungracious, so mean spirited that at every evidence of vulnerability they will turn on us like raging animals. But then they stand self condemned and God Himself will deal with them. But if our hearts are clean, and we are humble, then we can confront offenses in a Biblical manner (Mat 15:18, Gal 6:1 2 Tim 2:23 etc.).

Forgiveness is not just ignoring sin. Out of love we are commanded to go to one another, in gentleness and humility and confront our brother’s sin. It may be that in God’s providence we are the means by which God will restore him to Himself. But confrontation is never a super-spiritual way of getting back at someone. Our goal is to restore our brother, not revenge ourselves (Rms 12:19ff). We confront the offender privately first then with witnesses who can then verify the truthfulness of the offense (cf. Matt 18:15ff). We do not allow confrontations to degenerate into quarrels because we have already worked on our own attitudes first. Instead, we are kind to all (1 Tim 2:19ff) and patient knowing that only God can grant repentance. We can afford to be gentle and patient, because we are fore armed with the knowledge that God is sovereign, that He is working in our brother’s life, just as He is working in ours. We can give grace, because we have received grace.

And if our brother does not repent, then we tell it to the Church and let the church exercise it’s adjudication powers. If we have been slow to anger, allowing love to cover a multitude of transgressions, patient, even tempered, kind and gentle, then God will work. Sometimes, evil churches only show their true colors under the pressure of godly rebuke. But we can still forgive them, and allow God to judge them. But usually, if we approach the issue in the right way, with the right spirit and right intention, God will bless.

Conclusion:

People will frustrate you, hurt you, forsake you, disappoint you. Expect it, get used to the idea and when they do, the shock and pain will be less. Forgiveness requires us to say to God, and our brother, “I will remember your sin no more.” Therefore, do not dwell on the offense, talk to others about it or mull it over in your mind. When the hurt and pain arise, pray for that person, ask God’s grace and blessing for them. In the meantime, always treat the offender kindly, gently, lovingly. If you are in the right, God will judge the offender. We can afford to give a blessing, because we have inherited one.

Finally, the basic, fundamental principle that ought to govern all our relations with each other is “love covers a multitude of transgressions.” Does God smite you hip and thigh for every single violation of His Law that you commit every day? No? Then if God who is only holy and righteous can forbear your sins against Him, how can you forebear your brother, granting forgiveness even before he asks?

Granted, there are sins against God that require church discipline. Granted there are hard hearted people who are factious and divisive and Scripture requires us to separate from them (Titus 3:10). But even so, we mourn for them, we pray for their repentance and we seek for their restoration. If we would just forgive each other, and be kind to one another, then the entire world would line up to see this great miracle in their midst. And we would be ready to inherit the earth.

If you've enjoyed this article, and would like to support Dr. B's ministry, please consider a contribution. Thank you for your support.

Brian Abshire

"Dr. B" has served as a Biblical counselor, lecturer in theology, youth, singles, young married and senior pastor. He is currently the Teaching Elder at Highlands Reformed Church, (Hanover Presbytery, Reformed Presbyterian Church).

Christian Church, Christian Culture, Christian Family, Christian Life, Doctrinal Issues, Pastoral Concerns Add to del.icio.us Digg This Subscribe to RSS feed •

Email This Post

Possibly Related Posts:

One Response to “Studies on the Nature of Biblical Authority”

GordonMay 26th, 2009 at 7:53 am

I was truly blessed with your knowledge of the the sriptures (rightly divided) wisdome & gentleness in Christ. I am at work presently but I intend to read this again and again. I am struggling with these issues however I have been humbled with your wisdom it is God sent!
Gordon
are any of these lectures on tape?

Director’s Cut: