Restoring Family Worship, Part 1: Its Decline and Definition
Posted by deangonzales on June 29, 2009
I attended a Christian University along with 5,000 other students, most of whom came from Christian homes. Although I never conducted an official survey, my general impression was that very few of my fellow Christian students had grown up in homes where family worship had been regularly practiced. It was a foreign concept to most of them. I believe the general ignorance concerning family worship demonstrates just how far Christian families have departed from their Christian heritage. There was a time in the early days of this nation when family worship was a “household word” (no pun intended.). Generally speaking, Christian families understood it to be their duty to conduct in family worship in the home. For example, in 1677 the congregational church of Dorchester, Massachusetts, composed and signed a written covenant in which they pledged to faithfully carry out their Christian duties. Included among their resolutions, they promised
To reform our families, engaging ourselves to a conscientious care to set up and maintain the worship of God in them and to walk in our houses with perfect hearts in a faithful discharge of all domestic duties: educating, instructing, and charging our children and our households to keep the ways of the Lord.1
In like manner, the church in Boston, Massachusetts, whose pastor was the notable Increase Mather, made the following commitment to conduct family worship:
We promise (by the help of Christ) that we will endeavor to walk before God in our houses, with a perfect heart; and that we will uphold the worship of God therein continually, according as he in his word requires, both in respect of prayer and reading the Scriptures, that so the word of Christ may dwell richly in us.2
James Packer is correct when he informs us that “family worship was . . . vitally important [to the Puritans]. Every home should be a church, with the head of the house as its minister. Daily and indeed twice daily, the Puritans recommended, the family as a family should hear the word read, and pray to God.”3
Unfortunately, this Puritan commitment to family worship slowly weakened. Nearly a century later, Isaac Backus, a Baptist leader, called attention to this decline. Describing the spiritual condition of the land in 1766, he wrote
New England has formerly been a place famous for religion in general, and for Family worship in particular. But of late, the neglect of this, as well as other religious duties, has evidently been growing upon us; which has caused much grief to pious souls. But I have not heard that any discourse has been published upon this subject here these many years…. there have lately been numbers remarkably awakened in some parts of the land, who were trained up in the neglect of Family Prayer, and who are still at a loss about the Scriptural authority for the daily practice thereof.4
The nineteenth century witnessed still a further decline in the practice. In his book entitled, Thoughts on Family Worship (1847), the Presbyterian James Alexander laments
Our church cannot compare with that of the seventeenth century (the Puritan church) in this regard. Along with Sabbath observance, and the catechizing of children, Family-Worship has lost ground. There are many heads of families, communicants in our churches, and (according to a scarcely credible report) some ruling elders and deacons, who maintain no stated daily service of God in their dwellings.5
What would these men say about family worship in our homes today? I suspect that they would not be impressed. Is it any wonder that we are seeing the breakdown of the American family in our society? Is it any wonder that so few children raised in Christian homes embrace their parents’ Christianity? Is it any wonder that when contemporary Christians hear about the concept of family worship, they think of it as old-fashioned, puritanical, and out-of-style?
Whatever our contemporaries may think about family worship, I believe it’s a vital practice for the health of our families, our churches, and our society. Pastor Jerry Marcellino refers to it as the “Lost Treasure” that needs to be “rediscovered.” I agree that family worship is a lost treasure. But rather than using the word “rediscovered,” I would use word “recovered” or “restored.”6 It’s not enough that we rediscover and admire an old relic from the past. Family worship is a practice that needs to be restored in our homes. That will be the goal of this study.
Family Worship Defined
Alexander defines family worship as “the joint worship rendered to God by all the members of one household.”7 Certainly, that is an accurate and concise definition. However, I believe it would be helpful if we clarify and expand upon that definition.
To begin with, let’s clarify the meaning of the term “worship.” In general terms, worship refers to “the offering of homage, honor, and praise to God.”8 [6] As we examine the Scriptures, we find two levels of worship. On the one hand, the Bible speaks of worship as a “way of life”:
Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship (Romans 12:1).
On the other hand, the Bible also speaks of worship as formal religious act:
Ascribe to the LORD the glory of His name; Bring an offering and come into His courts. Worship the LORD in holy attire; Tremble before Him, all the earth (Psalm 96:8-9).
This is what the Apostle Paul had in mind when in Acts 24:11 he speaks of having gone “up to Jerusalem to worship.” Obviously, Paul is not referring to worship as a way of life. Rather, he is referring to a specific place and a specific time in which he engaged in specific acts of worship (cf. 21:26; 24:17). Thus, the Scriptures do not merely speak of worship in a broad sense, as a “way of life,” but they also speak of worship in a more narrow and technical sense. In other words, worship in this more narrow sense involves specific acts of reverence and adoration performed at specific times and specific places.
This is what we have in mind when we speak of “family worship.” We are not referring to the general philosophy or behavior of a family. Rather, we are referring to a specific occasion in which specific acts of worship are offered to God. Those acts of worship would usually include the reading and teaching of Scripture, the offering of prayer, and the singing of praise. We refer to it as family worship, because it is worship performed within the context of the home. In the days of the Puritans, as well as Bible times, the members of a household often included extended family and even servants or slaves. In our day, it usually consists only of immediate family members.
With these considerations in view, let me offer you an expanded definition of family worship:
Family worship is the occasion in which the members of a given family gather together in order to participate in special acts of worship, such as the singing of praise, the reading and hearing of Scripture, and the offering of prayer to God.
In the subsequent installments to this series, we’ll consider some biblical support (Part 2), some positive benefits (Part 3), and some practical guidelines (Part 4) for conducting family worship.
Bob Gonzales, Dean
Reformed Baptist Seminary
- Cited in Leland Ryken, Worldly Saints, p. 80. [↩]
- Ibid., 85. [↩]
- Quest for Godliness, p. 255. [↩]
- Cited in Jerry Marcellino, Rediscovering the Lost Treasure of Family Worship, p. 2. [↩]
- Thoughts on Family Worship, pp. 1, 2. [↩]
- Of course, Pastor Marcellino’s burden is not merely to reacquaint God’s people with a lost practice but to motivate them to recover this practice. So though I prefer my title (”Restoring” vs. “Rediscovering”), I don’t disagree with at all with the thrust of his booklet, have gleaned a number of insights from it, and would highly comment it to my readers. [↩]
- Thoughts on Family Worship, p. 9 [↩]
- Millard Erickson, Concise Dictionary of Theology, s.v. [↩]
June 29th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Bob, As usual, I am looking forward to this series.
Couple of questions that immediately come to mind when this topic is raised: To what degree can you biblically bind consciences regarding frequency and consistency? How will you biblically limit your assertions, bearing in mind the liberty that we have in Christ? Is there a need to be biblically cautious, if we accept that legalism is a more immediate manifestation of depravity among sincere Xians than, say, some dark and obvious transgression? By what means can this be encouraged to be a biblical practice that avoids artificial, tradition-induced guilt? Even when demonstrated to be a Biblical practice, how will one avoid being motivated toward this as mere duty and obligation instead of an act of love and worship (the idea of duty has already been strongly presented). Can the argument for the practice be presented in a way that elevates it above mere duty and obligation?
I stumbled briefly at the following comment: “Is it any wonder that so few children raised in Christian homes embrace their parents’ Christianity?” This is a leading question(and not an assertion, perhaps intentionally so)that would be difficult to answer with anything stronger than opinions. For instance, my opinion, based upon my years of working with families with children, is that the various forms of religiosity that many families fall into, regardless of how frequent or consistent they may be, often contribute to the falling away of children.
Knowing that you like to form an argument by anticipating objections, this is what is on my mind when the subject comes up. Will be interested to see what comes next.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Dennis,
Thanks for your helpful comments, concerns, and even (implied) cautions. I think this kind of input will be helpful as I attempt to develop this series. First, I do think that there’s a danger of binding on the consciences of God’s people a duty (particularly in the area of nature and frequency) that is unwarranted by Scripture. I hope to avoid that by resisting the temptation to draw unwarranted inferences from the passages we’ll examine. Second, while I don’t think duty is of necessity a bad or unbiblical motivation, I certainly don’t believe it’s the only proper motivation. That’s why I’m planning not only to provide biblical support for the practice but also to highlight some positive benefits. Third, I also intend to note that the mere performance of regular family devotions does not automatically guarantee our children will turn out alright. This is especially true where family worship is divorced from worship as a way of life. When children grow up in a home where God is only “worshiped” around the dinner table or in the living room one or twice a day but not loved and worshiped as a way of life, cynicism and hardness are often the result of such hypocrisy.
Please feel free to interact throughout the series whether with commendations or caveats. Your experience as a father, teacher, and pastor will be greatly welcomed.
Sincerely yours,
Bob G.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Bob,
You will end up building your case on OT inferences as there is no clear Scriptural command about family worship, and certainly no conscience binding time/frequency. To assert it when the Bible doesn’t is legalistic.
That being said, I have regular family devotions–not every day, but regularly. I enjoy doing so, but I’m not going to beat myself up over missing a day here or there.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Bob (& Dennis),
What often contributes to the falling away of children of believing parents is not, in my opinion, the “various forms of religiosity”, but rather, sinful hearts born under the curse and finally stirred up. Those who “fall away” were never binded to Christ to begin with. I grew up in a rather large Arminian Baptist church where most of my friends made false professions. They made these false professions because of the religiosity in their homes. They “fell away” because of the sin that was stirred up in their hearts in college, and not because their parents had any outward forms or norms of *religion* in their homes.
I am not for the house-church movement at all, but it seems that according to Acts 2, people did meet in homes on a daily basis for *worship*. It was a practical place to be since “Christianity” was considered a false sect and rejected by the Jewish leadership. They met “day by day” for “corporate” worship. I think this practice, once “corporate” worship was placed in a building, still remained a good one for them. Not all orthopraxy needed to be taught explicitly. It’s just what they did (in Acts). Some of the dads probably thought it was a consistent, biblical idea to worship God on a daily basis, whether or not other families came over for the same purpose.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:42 am
This is an excellent idea for a series and one which I have also been contemplating in raising my children. If you are taking requests, so to speak, I would be very interested in any developments in your analysis which cover the questions that have been most pressing to me wherever I have studied this question. In case you are interested, I give them below in no particular order:
1. Given that GOD despises the “worship” (the sacrifices and praise and thanksgiving, etc.) that wells up from a heart determined upon a course for its own glory, how can we responsibly suppose that He cherishes a “family worship” which includes members, such as children, who are lost.
2. Should we encourage lost children to pray when GOD despises the prayers of those whose hearts are far from Him?
3. What should the focus of Bible study be when children are not Christians and cannot, therefore, understand the things of the Spirit of GOD? Should it only be an evangelistic message, assuming that this is the foundation of any further progress in spiritual knowledge?
4. Should family worship involve only those members who are faithful follwers of the Most High and conducted in such a way as to display the very real exclusion that already exists of those who continue to reject the LORD? Indeed, they exclude themselves by their stubbornness.
5. Should our language reflect the reality of the greater bond that exists between the brethren than even between parents and children by blood?
6. Should we expect children to sing hymns or offer utterances out loud that belie what is really in their hearts? Will that not smack of hypocrisy and an empty formalism to them?
I believe you are right, however, that family worship seems to have a strong place in the hearts and minds of many of our more mature and discerning spiritual ancestors. Ichabod Spencer, for instance, singles it out for its necessity in one of the “Pastor’s Sketches” for which he was famous (vol. II) which seemed to help a troubled soul immensely.
Even if we disagree with such men, we must have good reasons for doing so. As for me, the problems I mention above have caused me some hesitation so that my own efforts have proceeded by fits and starts. Perhaps you can help, dear brother…
June 29th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I realize that you did not address your remarks to me, Mr. Ortiz, but I hope you won’t mind if I ask you about them.
Did I rightly understand you to be suggesting that the apparent apostasy of your friends was due primarily to the religious atmosphere of their homes such that they came to believe themselves to be Christian because they had inherited, superficially, a way of thinking and speaking (a Christian “culture,” if you will)? Is this meant to suggest that it is probably more deceptive to raise children up in an atmosphere of solid instruction, family devotions and religious interest?
June 29th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Hi Benjamin,
I left out a very crucial word – “perhaps”. I apologize. So, what I meant was that in the Arminian Baptist churches that I grew up in (3 big ones), one which had hundreds of young people, there was always pressure for kids to make professions of faith, as well as *rededications* to Christ. Therefore, I know that some of my friends indeed made professions of faith because of the atmosphere in the home, where it was expected and encouraged without any real understanding of what saving faith was.
In my own example, I was told the gospel and commanded to repent and believe. I repented and believed. I have never “fallen away” (as is taught in many churches) in order to return like a “prodigal son”. I believe God saved me very early in life. So it was weird to see friends make professions of faith that seemed very inconsistent with the religion of their homes (whether good or bad) as well as their own lives. The primary reason why they eventually left the church or any association with Christ really had little to do with their homes. Most of my friends made conscious decisions to walk away from the church during their college years. Having been involved in Youth Ministry both secular and church sponsored, I have always taught young people that their professions of faith will all be tested in the real world of *life apart from mom and dad*. I have always taught to not be self-deceived, and to look at their hearts, to see what their hearts desired.
I have also had a handful of friends who weren’t saved until their college years who had excellent instruction in their homes. The Lord used both their parents and the devotional instruction they received to temper them from getting involved with what we would call the more heinous and outward sins. I know one such gal to this day, a Missionary Pastor’s Kid, who is a professing atheist, after having professed Christ as a young girl, who won’t participate in the debaucheries of her university setting because of the instruction she has received in her home growing up. She actually knows the Bible better than the average college aged Christian and her reasoning for not getting involved in college type sins is that she “might” be saved one day and she knows sinning now would provide more guilt in the future.
So, what I observed many times was that certain parents wanted to convinced their children that they were saved, when it seemed that I observed that their children really weren’t. Parents always pointed their children back to a Baptism Date or a Sunday School class where they made their profession of faith.
In the case of the PK I mentioned above, her parents always taught her to look at the evidence she produced and to deal with her heart. She participated in daily and weekly family devotional time, but was never taught to rely on the past.
All men are called to repent and believe everywhere. All men are called to worship the living God everywhere. All men are called to pray to the One true God. Yet, God will not receive worship offered up apart from faith in Christ. God will not hear the voice of the unbelieving so as to answer them. Apart from faith in Christ, it will always be impossible to please God. Family Devotions and devotional time has great benefits to all of society, especially the elect. I would dare say it even has non-salvific benefits for the reprobate.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I would suggest that much of this has to do with parental neglect and the abdication of this responsibility of teaching children to the local church. Is it not possible that parents look at the Sunday school, youth group and Vacation Bible School and assume that they are meeting their responsibility for educating their children by getting them to church on time? Instead of a sacred charge it is an onerous obligation, one discharged by shipping kids off to the professionals to handle?
June 29th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
There are a couple of issues at hand that must be considered, mostly in light of the comments here. First, it is impossible to honor the intent of the “shema” without worship. In fact, in all godly instruction we are worshiping – ascribing worth to God. It matters not whether our children are saved or not. We must continuously and vigorously point them to and teach them about the worship of God. We must do all we can to help them understand that Christ is the center of every aspect of our lives. Anything less is idolatry. Is not “doing all things as unto God” worship? (1 Cor 10:31; 1 Pet 4:11)
Second, our religious instruction must be the pursuit of a heart that embraces God as who He is and desires His glory above all else. This does not mean that we tell them what to think and what to do. That’s part of it, but in the process we must be teaching them the whys of it. In doing so we teach them HOW to think. In doing so we teach them that simple obedience without understanding and a desire for God’s glory is not what honors God and is actually abhorrent in His eyes. “Give me your heart my son” should be the resounding motive of a father who has a heart for his son and desires his godliness above all else.
To fail to instruct our children in righteousness, whether it’s in reading Scripture, teaching lessons, seizing daily opportunities, singing hymns/songs or praying, is to fail to raise up our children in the way they should go. It is to exasperate them, for they will have no foundation upon which to build unless God uses other means (Eph 6:4). What a tremendous blessing to be an instrument God uses to build a godly heritage. And what a sad state so many families are in where an godly heritage that is perpetuated is in spite of the parents.
As for God not hearing the cries of the unbelieving – was Hagar an unbeliever? Was Ishmael? (Gen. 21:16-17)
June 29th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Hi Keith,
Well, it’s possible to infer from the text in Genesis 16 and the actions of Hagar that *she* was indeed a believer. Hagar obeyed the angel of the Lord by returning to her mistress, and she also is the first in the text of Scripture to actually name God (v. 13). At this point, Abram and Sarai are acting in sin, contra Hagar.
I do not believe Ishmael was a believer though (Gen. 17:18). When God heard the voice of the boy Ishmael, it was his *crying* that God heard (Gen. 21:17). I don’t think Ishmael was praying to God at all. Please look at the context. God offered only temporary benefits to Ishmael.
See also;
Proverbs 15:8 – The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD, But the prayer of the upright is His delight.
Proverbs 15:29 – The LORD is far from the wicked, But He hears the prayer of the righteous.
Do you see the contrasts in these two Proverbs?
En Cristo,
Walter
June 29th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Brother Gonzales, thank you for this exhortation and informative post. I look forward to additional posts on the subject.
June 30th, 2009 at 8:56 am
[...] Part 1, we defined family worship as “the occasion in which the members of a given family gather [...]
June 30th, 2009 at 9:11 am
[...] [...]
June 30th, 2009 at 9:55 am
Ron wrote:
You will end up building your case on OT inferences as there is no clear Scriptural command about family worship, and certainly no conscience binding time/frequency. To assert it when the Bible doesn’t is legalistic. That being said, I have regular family devotions–not every day, but regularly. I enjoy doing so, but I’m not going to beat myself up over missing a day here or there.
Bob replies:
Ron, I appreciate the caution. As you’ll see in Part 2 of this study, I acknowledge at the outset that the biblical support for the practice of family worship is largely inferential (from both Old and New Testaments). Of course, basing doctrine or practice on inference is warranted by Scripture (e.g. Jesus does it, Matt 22:31-33) provided that the inference is justifiable. For instance, I’d imagine that you oblige your children to keep their rooms tidy (at least reasonably so) and brush their teeth. You base your expectation not merely on the 5th commandment but also on certain inference you draw from Scripture related to orderliness and good hygiene. I’ll address the question of “frequency” when I offer some guidelines. But thanks again for the caution. I do acknowledge the danger of placing unwarranted weight on the consciences of God’s people in this area.
Your servant,
Bob G.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:55 am
Walter wrote:
What often contributes to the falling away of children of believing parents is not, in my opinion, the “various forms of religiosity”, but rather, sinful hearts born under the curse and finally stirred up.
Bob replies:
Walter, I agree with you that the buck ultimately stops with the rebellious child. Hence, we can’t simply blame a child’s sinful response to God on a poor upbringing. Nevertheless, I think you agree that poor parental examples are used by Satan to entice children away from God. Just as the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles on account of the hypocrisy of the Jews, so children may turn from the Lord on account of religious hypocrisy in the home.
Your servant,
Bob G.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Benjamin queries:
1. Given that GOD despises the “worship” (the sacrifices and praise and thanksgiving, etc.) that wells up from a heart determined upon a course for its own glory, how can we responsibly suppose that He cherishes a “family worship” which includes members, such as children, who are lost?
2. Should we encourage lost children to pray when GOD despises the prayers of those whose hearts are far from Him?
3. What should the focus of Bible study be when children are not Christians and cannot, therefore, understand the things of the Spirit of GOD? Should it only be an evangelistic message, assuming that this is the foundation of any further progress in spiritual knowledge?
4. Should family worship involve only those members who are faithful follwers of the Most High and conducted in such a way as to display the very real exclusion that already exists of those who continue to reject the LORD? Indeed, they exclude themselves by their stubbornness.
5. Should our language reflect the reality of the greater bond that exists between the brethren than even between parents and children by blood?
6. Should we expect children to sing hymns or offer utterances out loud that belie what is really in their hearts? Will that not smack of hypocrisy and an empty formalism to them?
Bob replies:
Ben, hopefully the answers to some of your questions will be addressed in the subsequent posts. For now, I’ll offer some brief responses.
Answer to question #1: I believe God commands the heads of families to teach those of their household about who God is and what he requires. See Part 2. When I, as a father, carry out that duty with a right heart, then I please my heavenly Father (Gen. 18:19; Deut. 6:7-9; Eph. 6:4).
Answer to question #2: Here are a few responses: First, God commanded the entire nation of Israel to sing and pray, knowing that many of them still had uncircumcised hearts. Of course, God also exhorted them to circumcise their hearts, i.e., to be converted (Deut. 10:16). Second, the Bible teaches us that giving of praise and thanksgiving is the duty of all mankind, not just believers (Pss. 148:7-13; 150:6). Third, the Lord Jesus Christ does not rebuke but rather commends the praise of children when it is offered to him (Matt. 21:15-16). So yes, I teach my children from a very early age that they should pray and praise God and explain how they are to do so in a manner pleasing to God. The Scriptural teaching that God despises the prayers of the ungodly (Prov. 15:8; 28:9) needs to be qualified. God does respond in some sense positively to the prayers of pagans (Jonah 1:14-16) and to the superficial penitence of an ungodly king (1 Kings 21:27-29).
Answer to question #3: Of course we should proclaim the good news to our children that they might be converted. But we should also teach the law of God because it exposes their sin (Rom. 3:20). Indeed, we should teach them the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27) since it provides all the background information need to place the gospel in its proper redemptive-historical context.
Answer to question #4: I would not exclude my children from family worship any more than I’d exclude unbelievers from attending a corporate worship service of the church. Since the early church apparently welcomed unbelievers into their corporate worship services (1 Cor. 14:23-25), I see no reason why I must exclude my as yet unconverted children from family worship. God will do that, of course, on the Day of Judgment.
Answer to question #5: I’m not exactly sure what you’re alluding to here. I do believe that we should clearly instruct our household that one is only truly a member of the New Covenant family of God by faith and not on the basis of bloodlines (John 1:12-13). Moreover, we ought to make it clear to our spouse and children that our allegiance to Jesus and to our spiritual family takes priority over our allegiance to any earthly bond (Luke 14:26; Mark 3:34-35).
Answer to question #6: See my answer to question #2.
I hope this is helpful.
Your servant,
Bob Gonzales
June 30th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Walter remarks,
Family Devotions and devotional time has great benefits to all of society, especially the elect. I would dare say it even has non-salvific benefits for the reprobate.
Bob replies:
Great observation, Walter. I hope to touch on this in Part 3 of the study.
BG
June 30th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Arthur writes:
I would suggest that much of this has to do with parental neglect and the abdication of this responsibility of teaching children to the local church.
Bob replies:
Helpful observation, Arthur. I believe that the covenant community does have an obligation to instruct children in the ways of God (e.g., Deut. 31:10-13; Neh. 8:3; Eph. 6:1-2). Nevertheless, parents have an even greater responsibility and too often expect the church to do it all for them.
BG
June 30th, 2009 at 10:12 am
To Mr. Ortiz…
Thank you for that sincere and penetrating response, brother. Those stories are so very familiar to me and are a part of my life and experiences with others as well. This insidious selfishness of parents who refuse to discipline their children for their spiritual degradation and, in their pride, cast an insistent tone like a net over them, reminding these youths that they are “safe” and mustn’t question the gift bestowed upon them when they knelt and prayed as instructed all those years ago. Indeed, the whole concept of “rededicating” one’s life to Christ seemed to me, even as a boy, an obvious farce which exposed the awful nature of the entire charade. It was clear that, whatever else the “rededicator” had done and was doing, it had nothing to do with dedication.
At the same time, the youth are hardly guiltless themselves. There was always the possibility, when they realized that their parents’ religion lacked seriousness, to pursue a more serious search into Christ. Partly because of their lack of training (Proverbs 22:6), they chose to give in easily to the temptation to use this dry and paultry spiritual background as an excuse to dismiss religion altogether. Oh, I have known far too many such people and, most often, they have been arrogantly disposed against the Way. How much must be undone with them…
To Mr. Johnson…
I believe I noted that some of your response at least was addressed to various things I had brought up in my questions for Brother Gonzales. I would like, therefore, to respond because your answer was intriguing to me and I think deserves serious attention.
In the first half of your comment, you described the need for Christians to worship before their children. I entirely agree. “It matters not whether our children are saved or not,” we must continue to point them to our Master and King, and teach them what true worship means as we “do all we can to help them understand that Christ is the center of every aspect of our lives” and, in some sense, even of theirs as well. I hope that I did not give the very inadequate impression that I was not of one mind with you in this.
Your argument then continues in a direction I must ask about:
“This does not mean that we tell them what to think and what to do. That’s part of it, but in the process we must be teaching them the whys of it. In doing so we teach them HOW to think.”
I spend a great deal of time on this with my own children, yet I must say that I cannot agree, assuming I have understood you here, that we mustn’t tell our children what to think and what to do. GOD Himself commands them what to think and do, even as He instructs them, though not always, in the why’s and how’s. Our children are often wrong in their attitudes, their thinking and their behavior and their errors are not always easily explained in the vocabulary they can comprehend when they are very young. In time, they will be able to fathom much of it, yet we must always be telling them what to think and what to do. Any parent with children knows that commandments are constantly needful and cannot be adequately replaced by explanations and instructions. They are better supplemented by such things.
But I think we are essentially in agreement that “simple obedience without understanding and a desire for God’s glory is not what honors God and is actually abhorrent in His eyes”. Amen. The motive and disposition of the heart toward Him is everything in the law.
But this is exactly why I voiced my earlier puzzled contemplation of this matter. My own daughter, as we sang hymns in church, turned to me and said that she did not know how to sing these songs because the words were not her feelings. She felt the hypocrisy of singing, for instance, “I once was lost but now am saved, was blind but now I see” when she knows that Jesus declares to the lost Pharisees that, because they claimed to see in their spiritually blind condition, then their guilt remained and they were condemned by their deceitful testimony about themselves (John 9:41).
It’s an excellent point and I told her that she should refrain from singing such things. I only encourage her to be involved when we sing sections of Scripture that do not require her to voice anything that would make her, by the use of certain indexicals, utter what is not true. She cannot, for instance, sing with David, “Oh, how I love your law”, at least in reference to herself.
As for Hagar and Ishmael, I believe that our brother, Mr. Ortiz, has answered this satisfactorily. It is hardly surprising that Hagar would be a believer in the house of Abraham where every servant was consecrated to Yahweh. And GOD may choose to make Himself known to any, including Ishmael, who do not of themselves seek Him out.
Of course, when I say that the prayers of lost children are an abomination to Him, I am not referring to their cry for salvation, which would hardly be the aspect of their “worship” that gives me pause.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:28 am
J. Keith Johnson,
Thanks for your helpful observations above (comment #9).
As for the question of whether God hears the prayers of unbelievers (here I’m addressing both Keith and Walter), we need to remember:
(1) God commands every moral creature to trust and praise him.
(2) Logically, prayer precedes conversion and temporally coincides with conversion. If this is so, then it wouldn’t make sense to prohibit an unbeliever from praying until he’s first converted.
(3) I agree that God desires true heart religion. Therefore, prayer or praise from an unregenerate heart cannot truly please him. Nevertheless, the Bible does, I believe, furnish examples of God responding in some sense positively to the prayers and penitence of unregenerate men even though their plea for deliverance and act of penitence may have fallen short of saving faith (Jonah 1:14-16; 1 Kings 21:27-29).
(4) I think we all agree that there are degrees of sin. In my opinion, the references to prayers that God abominates are probably referring to prayers offered by religious people (like Pharisees) who have a great deal of special revelation but who’ve hardened their heart against God and who presume that mere religious ritual will satisfy his expectations (see Matt. 6:5; Mark 12:40; Matt. 15:8).
None of the above is to deny the fact that God desires men to pray and praise him in true faith and love. Indeed, without the right kind of faith, it’s impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). But that isn’t limited to religious acts. The unbeliever cannot eat, drink, love his family, serve as an employer or employee, obey the laws of the land, etc., to the glory of God apart from a regenerate heart. Yet I doubt any of us would discourage unbelievers from engaging in these activities simply because they have not yet trusted in Christ.
Your servant,
Bob Gonzales
June 30th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Dr. Gonzales…
Thank you so much for your interest, brother, and your willingness to be of help to me in this matter. In hopes that I may tread devotedly up the right path, I want to say that I agree with everything you have said, though there may have been a misunderstanding in regard to your response to question #2 and #4.
Of course, we should require our children to sing praises to GOD and to thank Him and we should not “exclude” them from family worship in the sense that we must not be intolerant of their presence in the midst of our own worship. I bring my children to church services like any other parent. Nevertheless, I was more interested in whether we should exclude our unregenerate children from worship in the sense that we exclude them from taking the Supper and being baptized, which are also of course commandments of Christ to all nations.
But like baptism and the Supper, to properly keep sacred any of GOD’s instructions for worship there remains the prerequisite that one have the heart of a “disciple.” Without this, my children are not praising or thanking GOD at all. Thus, when He commands that they do these things, just as when He commanded Israel to do these things, He was commanding that they do so with a certain kind of heart. When they did not, He voiced His supreme displeasure with all their so-called worship.
That brings up an interesting question of its own. If we command our children to worship the LORD according to His intention behind the term, should we discipline them when they do not obey? GOD punished Israel when they had no heart for His worship. Should we also punish our children who do not offer prayers and thanksgiving for His glory?
June 30th, 2009 at 10:37 am
By the way… none of the above response to you, Dr. Gonzales, I hope you will take to be a denial of the essential obedience that must be given by the lost in the requirement that they are to renew a right heart within themselves. Obviously, to pray and give thanks with a right heart requires that they adopt a right heart and their prayers of repentance for forgiveness and mercy, if sincere, presuppose a regenerate nature already.
It must be seen, therefore, that it is wrong for the lost to ask of GOD anything without a right heart and should be dissuaded from heartless or uninterested prayers for anything. Nevertheless, I would never discourage the earthly man or woman from seeking GOD with a heart melted by conviction. Given that GOD commands them to seek Him and to praise Him and give thanks to Him with just such a heart, it would be evil to discourage it.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Ah, and I apologize that I missed the significance of this remark the first time I read it:
“The unbeliever cannot eat, drink, love his family, serve as an employer or employee, obey the laws of the land, etc., to the glory of God apart from a regenerate heart. Yet I doubt any of us would discourage unbelievers from engaging in these activities simply because they have not yet trusted in Christ.”
Oh, but brother, I say with all affection for you that this is a thoroughly faithless saying. This is exactly what we are all called to do. Please, consider it this way… When is the day of salvation? Is it not, today? What is it that we say of the lives of such men and women? Is it not that they are filthy, abhorrent and that their best righteousness is perverse wickedness and an abomination to GOD? Do they “love” their children in reality? Hardly, because they are busy loving themselves.
Of course they should not do these things for another minute, not another second, and I would do my best to dissuade them from pursuing these things anymore as rebels. They have no right to take even another breath in their enmity against heaven. We should call them to stop it at once. Wouldn’t you?
June 30th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Benjamin,
As always, your questions reveal a mind that thinks carefully and precisely. They are, to some extent, of a casuistic nature. Therefore, please read my answers as an attempt to offer brotherly counsel regarding specific scenarios based on the general teachings of God’s word.
In your second question, you ask, “Should we encourage lost children to pray when GOD despises the prayers of those whose hearts are far from Him?” I answered affirmatively on the basis of several lines of Scriptural evidence. But you further point out that God only accepts genuine worship. In light of that, you query whether we, as parents, should discipline or punish our children when they fail to praise or thank God with a right heart. You point out that God punished Israel when the people worshiped him without true faith.
My short answer is that (1) we should exhort our children to do everything–eating, drinking, playing, learning, working, and worshiping (in the narrow sense)–to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31). (2) we should warn and admonish them to beware of offering to God any form of service or obedience or worship that doesn’t arise from true faith and love. (3) inasmuch as our child’s sinful heart may reveal itself outwardly in any form of service to God–whether in worshiping God in the broader sense or in the narrower sense–we should apply appropriate forms of discipline and/or punishments. These may include verbal censures, public rebukes, corporeal discipline, etc. (4) since we are not God and cannot stand as the final and omniscient judge of the heart, we should leave final judgment to him. We should also remember that though God did eventually judgment Israel for her faithlessness, he was profoundly longsuffering and offered them many “second changes.”
In your fourth question you ask, “Should family worship involve only those members who are faithful followers of the Most High and conducted in such a way as to display the very real exclusion that already exists of those who continue to reject the LORD?” Once again, I answered affirmatively based on Scriptural precedent. You then clarified that you weren’t referring so much to the exclusion of their presence but to the exclusion of their participation. You offered baptism and the Lord’s Supper as examples. I reply (1) obviously the church is to consist (de jure) of believers only. Hence, the sacraments are withheld from non-believers. (2) it does not follow, however, that unbelievers are to be excluded from listening to and learning from the word of God. On the contrary, they should be encouraged to do so. Yes, they are to mix their listening and learning with true faith and love. If they don’t, they will have to answer for that on the day of judgment. (3) Accordingly, if the Bible commands my children to worship God as a way of life as well as to engage in special acts of worship, then I as their father will do what I am authorized by God to do, namely, instruct them as to the what, how, and why. And I will admonish them to perform their service to God with a right heart. Whether they do or not is ultimately a matter for which they are responsible.
So, when I conduct family worship, I expect the following from my children: (1) they are to listen to the word of God and learn who He is and what He requires; (2) they are to respond to the word with faith and obedience; (3) they are to join their hearts with mine as I lead the family in prayer. Once again, I enjoin them to offer praise, petition, thanksgiving, etc., with hearts of faith; (4) they are to join with the family in praising God in song. They are encouraged to praise God from the heart. if the heart is not lovingly engaged, then they are encouraged to do what their daddy does–repent while their singing.
This method of nourishing my children in the fear and admonition of the Lord has not yet (as far as I can tell) resulted in producing either Pharisees or cynics among my children. My two oldest (17 and 14) are professing Christians and members of our church. Our middle son (11) professes faith in Christ but is currently wrestling with assurance. Our two youngest boys (9 and 7) are outwardly compliant and have not shown any overt rebellion to the things of God. When they commit sin and I discipline them, we always close by praying together–asking the Lord to forgive their sin (as well as daddy’s remaining sin) and for the grace to trust and obey.
Hope this helps.
Bob Gonzales
June 30th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Benjamin seems to take issue with my remark in comment #20. There I write,
In contrast, Benjamin asserts,
Bob’s answer:
(1) As I’ve repeated many times, I would exhort unbelievers to do everything to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31) and define their failure to do so as sin (Rom. 3:23), the wages of which will be death (Rom. 6:23).
(2) Would I tell them to “stop at once,” as you suggest I do? Do you mean that literally? If so, I find your suggestion quite unrealistic, and I doubt very much that you consistently carry it out. For example, if you were dying of a bullet wound and learned that the doctor removing that bullet to save your life was not a Christian, would you insist he stop immediately? If a fireman is preparing to rescue a child from a burning building and you learn that he’s not a believer, would you demand that he stay put and let the child die? Would you tell the pilot of the plane your flying in to let go of the wheel, turn off the engines, and desist from piloting the aircraft simply because he’s a non-believer?
(3) If you mean “stop at once” in a less literal, less absolute sense, that is, if you’re simply suggesting that we should urge unbelievers to cease leaving a life of unbelief and hypocrisy, then I agree. However, though my youngest child may not yet have the faith to make his bed and clean up his room and learn his math to the glory of God, I will by no means insist that he desist from such activities until he becomes a believer. I’ll command him to do his duty to the glory of God and to repent of everything he does that is not to the glory of God, and I’ll assure him that a day of reckoning is coming when God will judge both his motives and his actions–all of his in a spirit of love, humility, and prayer that God may bless my instruction and admonition to the salvation of his soul.
Your servant,
Bob Gonzales
June 30th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Thank you for your excellent responses, precious brother. Before I address anything else, while I’m still smiling at the very humorous images you selected, I should probably clarify that, yes, I agree with you of course that we cannot require others to turn off the engines of a plane in order to pause to pray, and ironically crash to their deaths in order to comply with the mandate that they should repent and live.
Nevertheless, all silliness aside, I think we have slightly different reasons for dismissing this idea. I must insist with the Puritans that there is more evil in the least sin than in the greatest amount of suffering. Alright, what are the implications of this? Though you may think it a bit radical in nature and find it hard to believe, I would say that the reason I would not wish a physician operating on me to stop and turn to Christ in the midst of his work is not at all because I am afraid this would cause me irreparable harm. All other things being equal, I really wouldn’t care. But, as things are not “equal” in such contexts, there is a much greater concern that must be weighed than simply the effects upon my health. My greater frustration would be, rather, that leaving me to die could never produce the fruit I would so dearly desire in that physician.
Everything that a natural man does is evil, though some things are more or less evil than others. Operating upon a person to one’s own glory is, for example, less evil than letting a person die to one’s own glory. It is, therefore, hardly possible to repent of evil through the choice of an even greater evil. It is clearly an indication of a perverse motivation of the heart when one decides that it has become necessary to worship the devil, even for a moment, in order to inherit the whole world for Christ.
Nor would my original statement make such things even necessary. My meaning, of course, was from the beginning that in the midst of life all people must be exhorted to cease doing what they do for their own glory. The activity itself is not the issue but rather one’s motivation for doing “whatever you do” and the disposition of the heart as one does it.
In a rebellious state, even if we were to freeze “at once” in a comically physical sense, this would hardly stop us from being sinful because we would have ceased our activity, just as we previously chose to move about, all for our own glory. Our whole existence as rebels is offensive, not merely our outward activity, and so our deaths are certainly less offensive than our continued sinfulness unless our continued sinfulness, as the case happens to be, can be made to give greater glory to GOD.
In one sense, therefore, it would be better for us to die than continue acting for our own glory, but that is hardly our only choice. Rather than choose to die or allow others to die, we should choose simply to live and act for the glory of GOD, which is best of all. I can, in other words, hold to my original position without perishing on the horns of the dilemma you’ve erected for me precisely because, like the matador, there is no necessity in pausing to pray in the midst of a bullfight even if we are called to “pray without ceasing.”
Life becomes a prayer when we live to His glory. Why not then just refuse to accept what I originally set out to do for myself? Why not simply choose to offer the very next act, to lay the next moment at the feet of the cross, for GOD’s glory, in one’s determination to repent of that former life of self-glorification? Afterward, one can seek forgiveness from Him for a life of corruption. Repenting and then seeking forgiveness seems the right order of procedure.
At any rate, this was a fun interval, but my concern is not primarily for the physical well-being of myself and others any more than these things are primary for GOD. It is never right to say that we should not tell others to cease their lives of selfishness until they’ve come to Christ. It is rather true that we cannot say anything else, and it would be just sinful stubbornness on the part of the lost to interpret us to mean that we believe they ought to freeze their motions or strike a pose of prayer as though that were automatically less rebellious.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
I thought this was very helpful:
So, when I conduct family worship, I expect the following from my children: (1) they are to listen to the word of God and learn who He is and what He requires; (2) they are to respond to the word with faith and obedience; (3) they are to join their hearts with mine as I lead the family in prayer. Once again, I enjoin them to offer praise, petition, thanksgiving, etc., with hearts of faith; (4) they are to join with the family in praising God in song. They are encouraged to praise God from the heart. if the heart is not lovingly engaged, then they are encouraged to do what their daddy does–repent while their singing.
Thank you for sharing this with me. It suggested a possible path for me in resolving certain difficulties as I raise my own children.
June 30th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Bob,
I am comfortable with Jesus making inferences from Scripture, since He is holy and without sin. However, I am not comfortable with fallen men doing that and placing their convictions upon my conscience as the word of God to be obeyed. This is why many RB churches have legalistic tendencies. I know of a prominent RB church that disciplines it’s members for failing to have regular family devotions.
It’s the commandments that are binding, not any particular individual’s (or eldership’s) application of those commandments.
Thanks for your comments.
RM
June 30th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Mr. Marlin, I assume you are a fallen man and yet you draw numerous inferences from the Word of GOD for yourself and consider them necessary to be believed and obeyed. I also assume that you have some respect for the inferences of your pastor. After all, Christ gave us “the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” (Ephesians 4:11-14)
Otherwise, how are we to sharpen one another? How will the injunction of Scripture to receive correction and rebuke with meekness and humility be accomplished, if you cannot accept the inferences of fallen human beings? It is written, “Whoever heeds instruction is on the path to life, but he who rejects reproof leads others astray” (Proverbs 10:17).
Even if your response, as I suspect it would be, is that in all instances you will have to answer for whatever you choose to believe from the Scriptures (which, of course, includes this novel inference of your own regarding the inferences of others in the Church), how is that any different in the case before you? Dr. Gonzales is not demanding your obedience to his reasoning. He is only offering his ideas as the Word of GOD, to the best of his knowledge. As with a pastor or any the godly brothers and sisters throughout history (like Spurgeon), if you wish to give ear to them, it will only be because you accept the reasoning behind their opinions, as is true of any of us.
If a brother’s reasoning is poor, you have the opportunity to aid him in turn. If not, then it shall be the other way around, but it seems a sorry relinquishment of the obligations of love to ignore others’ beliefs in a radically private walk with Christ. No church could function and mature in grace according to this notion you’ve professed and it is not at all the instruction of Paul to those who would take his place after he was gone.
June 30th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Ron,
(1) The Scripture writers (including Jesus) provide for us a pattern of how rightly to interpret the Scriptures. The fact that they were inspired and we’re not doesn’t preclude the validity of their hermeneutical model.
(2) I’ve been a pastor for about 13 years. I’ve counseled and provided oversight to many sheep during that time. I’ve found that as a whole most Christians struggle with being consistent in their prayer life and in reading the Scriptures. Have I every disciplined anyone for that? No. Have I told them that they have no obligation to pray and read their Bibles? No. Do I encourage them to strive for consistency and regularity, as well as provide helpful strategies for doing so? Yes. Is that legalistic? If not, why not?
(3) If you’re a husband and/or father, perhaps you can share with the rest of us how you fulfill your duty loving your wife as Christ loved the church and nurturing your children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. Do you ever read the Bible to them? Do you every teach them principles from God’s word? Do you share the gospel with your children? Do you pray with them? Is once a year good enough? Do the Scriptures provide absolutely no guidelines for the manner and frequency by which you would carry out this stewardship?
Just curious.
Bob G.
July 1st, 2009 at 10:13 am
Benjamin says:
“I assume you are a fallen man and yet you draw numerous inferences from the Word of GOD for yourself and consider them necessary to be believed and obeyed.”
Indeed. I consider them necessary in my own household, but I don’t lay my convictions about relatively minor (comparatively speaking) or non-essential matters on the backs of other Christians. This, unfortunately, is commonly done in some RB churches.
Ephesians 4:11-14 is no refutation of my position. The ministry of the church is not dependent on asserting inferences as commandments.
Benjamin asks:
“Otherwise, how are we to sharpen one another? How will the injunction of Scripture to receive correction and rebuke with meekness and humility be accomplished, if you cannot accept the inferences of fallen human beings? It is written, “Whoever heeds instruction is on the path to life, but he who rejects reproof leads others astray” (Proverbs 10:17).”
Different people infer different things from the Scriptures. We all agree that “You shall not steal” is a clear command and not open to debate. However, inferences can open up a whole can of worms and, if pressed, can disturb the peace of whole churches. My contention is that pastors can offer their biblical reasoning for why they think such and such a thing is a good and necessary inference, but they cannot expect their personal convictions about that inference to placed on the backs of their sheep.
Benjamin says:
“Dr. Gonzales is not demanding your obedience to his reasoning. He is only offering his ideas as the Word of GOD, to the best of his knowledge. As with a pastor or any the godly brothers and sisters throughout history (like Spurgeon), if you wish to give ear to them, it will only be because you accept the reasoning behind their opinions, as is true of any of us.”
That’s fine. If this is just an intramural debate or discussion about family worship. In some places, however, this is considered a Christian duty and your spirituality is questioned or judged by your observance of it (or lack thereof). I cited an example of one prominent RB church disciplining members for failure to have regular family devotions. That is well beyond “accepting the reasoning behind their opinions”, that is elevating an inference to the level of a commandment, such as “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. That’s the danger I’m concerned about, and it is not theoretical.
This is not about a radically private walk with Christ, it’s about keeping the bounds of pastoral authority within the limitations set by the Great Shepherd.
July 1st, 2009 at 10:45 am
Bob,
(1) I do not question the validity of Jesus and Paul’s hermeneutical model. As the Son of God, and an inspired apostle, they certainly have the authority to press inferences on the conscience. However, I don’t grant that authority to uninspired believers utilizing their hermeneutical model.
(2) Christians do have an obligation to pray and read their Bibles. I’m glad you encourage your sheep and others to do so. I’m also glad you don’t discipline members because of their failures and shortcomings in these areas. We’d all be in big trouble if we were taken to task on these matters! And no, it’s not legalistic to exhort your people to read the Bible and pray.
(3) As a husband and father I do read the Bible to my family, pray, etc. I also believe that doing this daily is a good guideline, but having family devotions wasn’t my point of contention. Asserting it as a command (and I know you’re not necessarily going this far) when it is only inferred is what I am opposing.
I really appreciate your graciousness,
RM
July 1st, 2009 at 10:59 am
Bob,
Perhaps I can pose a further example of inference gone awry here. Let’s say your church requires attendance at all stated meetings. You infer from Scripture a pattern of morning and evening worship. You then, as the pastor, require that all members attend AM and PM services, otherwise they cannot become members of your church. You have a young husband and wife apply for membership, but they don’t have a conviction about attending the evening service (perhaps in the church circles they were in, they only had morning worship). Furthermore, they have 2 very young children, and they believe maintaining such a schedule on the Lord’s day will be too rigorous for them (and a tired Mommy). The husband also has a blue collar job that is physically demanding and he thinks 3 services on Sunday (including Sunday School) is very wearisome.
Now, these are genuine, fruit-producing Christians. They love the Lord. Do you let them become members of your church? Or do you hold them off until they submit to your inferences?
July 1st, 2009 at 12:53 pm
These are excellent points, Mr. Marlin. I especially appreciate your final contribution and the hypothetical example you offer. If you will, I would like to further clarify your meaning for myself that I might understand your conviction.
First, let me say that I empathize with what I take to be your overall concern. I had been Southern Baptist all of my life until recently when I entered into membership with my family at a Reformed Baptist, independent church. Initially, I found their curious requirements and personal convictions a bit beyond the bounds of legitimate inference and tried to reason with them. I found them, and especially my precious pastor, to be very humble people, willing to consider these questions fairly. I hope they find me to be the same, but they are this way precisely because they believe so much in the usefulness of honest Biblical reasoning.
That is why I am supposing at present that you are not intending to use “inference” in its more usual sense and must ask you what you mean by it. The term is usually defined as “the process of deriving the strict logical consequences of assumed premises” (the “assumed premises” being the explicit wording and statements of Scripture).
If you are using the term this way, then you cannot really avoid contradicting yourself. For example, you said:
“I don’t lay my convictions about relatively minor (comparatively speaking) or non-essential matters on the backs of other Christians. This, unfortunately, is commonly done in some RB churches.”
This, of course, is only “unfortunate” if it is wrongfully practiced, meaning that it is unbiblical to do such things. That seems to have been your belief as you have stated it so far. Now, clearly you are not suggesting that this is merely something you have chosen not to do. You believe that no church, no pastor and no Christian of any service should do this to any other. That is a moral obligation we all share.
Yet, what do you base this upon? There is no explicit command of Scripture that we not require obedience to “non-essentials” from each other? Indeed, there is hardly a list in the Bible outlining what these “non-essentials” might be. So, here you have argued that a moral expectation exists over every Christian to refrain from something you have inferred from Scripture; at least I assume you inferred it from Scripture.
You continue:
“Ephesians 4:11-14 is no refutation of my position. The ministry of the church is not dependent on asserting inferences as commandments.”
Again, this makes me suppose that you must have something other than the usual sense of the term in mind. In the usual sense, it would be quite false to claim that the ministry of the church does not depend entirely upon asserting inferences as commandments. Allow me to explain…
Every sermon, every doctrine, every practice and every expectation in each church which finds its lifeblood in the Word of our LORD is grounded in inference. This is necessary for several reasons:
1. All beliefs based in Scripture are grounded in the application of Scripture to our modern context. This is little else but an inference. You cannot get from the Bible to our time by explicit statements. Try it and if you remain strictly with the bounds of the explicit statements (separated from their implications), you will find yourself in an absurd situation.
2. All interpretation of Scripture is grounded in the examination of the contextual meaning of certain statements. The Scripture does not teach us how to interpret it but requires us to draw inferences from several places across the Word, even to appreciate otherwise explicit commands or to understand which explicit commandments any longer apply to us today.
For instance, when you argued, “We all agree that ‘You shall not steal’ is a clear command and not open to debate,” what you failed to appreciate is that, though explicit, its precise meaning and application to anyone today is not at all explicit. That sort of thing has to be determined by inference alone.
For further examples, please consider… Do you greet every brother and sister with a holy kiss? It is an explicit command of Paul’s to do this. Do you wash the feet of the saints, literally? It is an explicit command of Christ and if you don’t take it literally, you do this only because you have inferred that He did not mean it to be taken literally. Do you baptize every convert yourself? It is an explicit command of the Great Commission that those who make disciples should also baptize them. Do you require women in your churches to wear head coverings? Do you require women to remain silent in the churches? It is only an inference that could allow you to limit the explicit statement of Paul to a more narrow context because he does not narrow it himself. And, if you try to use some other passage from his epistles to limit this, that too would be an inference drawn from the assumption that those texts have anything to do with each other.
3. And, again, which of these explicit commands is a “non-essential”? Only inference will tell you.
4. Every form of discipline in the church (and we are explicitly commanded to discipline) is grounded in the practice of inference because various sins and wicked practices apply to explicit statements in the Bible only by inference for the simple reason that the Bible does not address us explicitly but only indirectly. Obviously the statements of the Bible were addressed expressly to their original audience and readers. It is only by inference that we reason these commands have believers today in mind as well.
5. How do you know who should be allowed baptism or the LORD’s Supper, membership into your church and would properly be recipients of Biblical discipline? That requires an inference based upon your supposition as to what precisely makes a true convert and who this term might rightly apply to among those around you.
6. And besides, I think you would agree that the commandment to “train up” our children “in the way they should go” is an explicit one. What must be inferred in order to keep this command is the meaning of the command and whether and how it applies to us today. But that is true of any command in the Bible…
Rather than multiply these examples indefinitely, I will say simply that if your own fallen, fallible human nature is not an impediment to yourself and your family, then it cannot be an impediment to you to submit to the discipline of the Church and the correction of others by inferences from the Word. You, I suspect, would expect your wife to submit to your leadership on some level and your children as well, but your expectation is dependent on a set of inferences you and they agree upon.
What I think you have a difficulty with is not the process of instructing, correcting, rebuking, disciplining and the like on the basis of inferences from Scripture (which are unavoidable). What you and I both dislike is the abuse of inference to serve an agenda that is not fairly drawn from Scripture at all. But that evil practice does not arise from inference. It arises from impoverished and self-serving inferences.
It is hardly necessary to dismiss the practice because many have abused it. Lots of people abuse explicit commands as well, do they not? Yet you would not toss out the practice of holding others even to certain explicit commands.
I hope that you hear the brotherly affection intended in this response and that it serves to profit you and those you love.
July 2nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
[...] considered the decline of family worship (Part 1) and some biblical support for its practice (Part 2), we turn now to look at some positive benefits, [...]
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Dear Walter,
Bob dealt with your point well. As for the proverbs, well, they’re proverbial. I’ll leave it at that.
Dear Benjamin,
I think you understood my intent. Perhaps I could have worded it more clearly, but my point was to avoid building legalists and strive to point the heart toward God. This is why we teach them how to think rather than MERELY what to think.
Dear Bob,
Thanks for your thoughtfulness here. Family worship has largely been set aside and/or over complicated. Simply reading through the Bible together and discussing the wondrous truths contained therein is worship. May more men gain a vision for God’s glory in their families.
For our King,
July 4th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Ron,
Let me try to respond to some of your caveats and concerns expressed above (comments #32 and #33):
You write, (1) I do not question the validity of Jesus and Paul’s hermeneutical model. As the Son of God, and an inspired apostle, they certainly have the authority to press inferences on the conscience. However, I don’t grant that authority to uninspired believers utilizing their hermeneutical model.
Bob’s response: Ron, your reasoning seems to go something like this: Jesus and the apostles were justified in employing a certain method of interpretation that included the practice of establishing doctrines or ethical norms on the basis of warranted inference because they were inspired. However, you’re basing your conclusion on an inference! The Bible nowhere explicitly teaches that only inspired and infallible teachers or writers can draw warranted inferences. On the other hand, when Jesus draws an inference that substantiates the resurrection from an OT passage that speaks of God as the God of the living, he’s not only justified in doing so but he condemns his non-inspired and non-fallible audience for failing to draw the same inference: “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God” (Matt. 22:29).
You write, (2) Christians do have an obligation to pray and read their Bibles.I’m glad you encourage your sheep and others to do so.I’m also glad you don’t discipline members because of their failures and shortcomings in these areas. We’d all be in big trouble if we were taken to task on these matters! And no, it’s not legalistic to exhort your people to read the Bible and pray.
Bob replies: Great. I think we’re getting closer in our understanding. We must be patient. We must be realistic. We must avoid being more dogmatic than the Bible permits. In the end, however, it’s not legalistic for me as a pastor to expect my people to love God’s word (Psa. 119:97) to praise his name (Pss. 13:6; 30:4; 89:1; Phil. 4:4; 1 Thess. 5:16) and to pray (Matt. 6:9-13).
You write, (3) As a husband and father I do read the Bible to my family, pray, etc. I also believe that doing this daily is a good guideline, but having family devotions wasn’t my point of contention. Asserting it as a command (and I know you’re not necessarily going this far) when it is only inferred is what I am opposing.
Bob replies: Family devotions is a way in which heads of households can fulfill their obligations to God and to those under their care. That’s how I would put it. I don’t believe the assumption of spiritual leadership in my home is simply a matter of liberty. Rather, it’s an obligation God has laid on me (Deut. 6:4-9; Eph. 6:4). Anyone who reads the Bible from cover to cover should gather that such spiritual leadership will entail the stewardship and privilege of communicating God’s word to those under my care (wife and children), as well as leading them in acts of worship. Questions of frequency and manner are certainly open for debate and may vary due to a variety of factors. So we shouldn’t be legalistic in the way we apply these principles. But, on the other hand, we shouldn’t simply assume that the whole matter a matter of indifference to God.
Finally, you pose an analogous case-study to enforce why you’re hesitant to view family worship as in any way obligatory. You write, Let’s say your church requires attendance at all stated meetings. You infer from Scripture a pattern of morning and evening worship.
Bob interjects: I never made that inference but I’m aware that some do.
Ron continues: You then, as the pastor, require that all members attend AM and PM services, otherwise they cannot become members of your church.
Bob interjects: I do think it’s a good idea to have a participating membership. So when people join our church, we ask them to make every effort to make the stated meetings unless providentially hindered.
Ron continues, You have a young husband and wife apply for membership, but they don’t have a conviction about attending the evening service (perhaps in the church circles they were in, they only had morning worship). Furthermore, they have 2 very young children, and they believe maintaining such a schedule on the Lord’s day will be too rigorous for them (and a tired Mommy). The husband also has a blue collar job that is physically demanding and he thinks 3 services on Sunday (including Sunday School) is very wearisome. Now, these are genuine, fruit-producing Christians. They love the Lord. Do you let them become members of your church? Or do you hold them off until they submit to your inferences?
Bob replies: Good questions, Ron. First, we try not to apply our attendance expectations rigidly. If there are extenuating circumstances, we grant members the freedom to miss one of the circumstances. Second, I do believe that issues such as distance (which requires lots of time on the road) can make for a very strenuous Lord’s Day. As a result, we’ve sometimes allowed some folk to miss the evening service on this account. Third, I’ve often wondered if 3 separate ministries of the Word on the Lord’s Day aren’t too much for the people of God to digest in one day. Accordingly, I’ve suggested on several occasions that we restructure our Lord’s Day in order to make it less strenuous for mothers with young children or for people who drive great distances.
In conclusion: I’m all in favor of sensitivity and realism. I’m also wary of laying a burden on God’s people that is unwarranted by Scripture. Nevertheless, I don’t want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. If a warranted principle or duty is misapplied or abused, shall we reject the principle or duty altogether? I think the Bible provides some warrant for the practice of family worship. At the same time, I don’t think we should be legalistic in our expectations of the frequency and/or the manner in which it’s conducted.
Hope this helps.
Your servant,
Bob Gonzales