Be careful when telling others to “trust God”

12 Sunday Jul 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Ministry

Tags

Biblical Counseling, Relying on God, Trusting God

There is sort phrase which Christians use, carelessly and often harmfully. I have seen and heard it used with great sincerity and without content or comprehension.

When faced with another’s overwhelming struggles, whether it is some loss or an immediate problem as crushing and quotidian as paying bills or watching children, we counsel one-another to “trust God” or “rely on God.” We are “turn over” our problems to God.

The more ambitious will add a reference such as Philippians 4:6-7, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything with prayer and thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God which passes understanding will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus.”

In counseling people, a preparatory question is, “What have you done about your circumstance?” To which the most common answer is, “I prayed and Philippians 4 didn’t work.”

The trouble which such an understanding of the work of God in human trouble is that distorts and discourages us.

If you are going to start an automobile, you need gasoline the tank and a functioning motor and a charged battery and you must turn the key and so on. Now imagine one who put gasoline in the car and then sat in the car waiting for it to start. We would think such a person crazy. And yet this is how we seem to think troubles work with God.

Prayer is critical in the process of relying upon God but it is not the only thing.

When you have a trouble, your reliance upon God is a reliance upon me. If I am here, and I can help, then I am part of that answer to prayer. The proposition is plain and common throughout Scripture. Perhaps we don’t see the connection because we have a tendency to compartmentalize the aspects of the Christian life in such a way that we don’t see the interrelated nature of the Church’s life.

In 2 Corinthians 1, Paul tells the Corinthians that in the midst of suffering God has given comfort to Paul so that Paul can give comfort to them. 2 Cor. 1:6. God is going to comfort them by means of Paul comforting them.

In Matthew 25, Jesus tells the story of judgment day when he will reward those who cared for the needy, because caring for the hungry or naked or the one in prison, they were caring for Jesus.

Paul in Galatians 6:2 writes, “Bear one another’s burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ.”

James writes in the second chapter of his letter that if you see a brother who is need of clothes and food and you say, “Be warm and filled” but you do not give him food and cloths, your faith is dead.

The point could be multiplied for pages.

To rely upon God is to rely upon the people of God, too.

Yes, can miraculously solve problems. And yes, God does give fortitude through unbearable trials.

But that is no excuse for me to neglect you. If you are to rely upon God in the midst of your trial, and I say that to you, then I must necessarily implicate myself. And I must necessarily see how easily I fail here.

And lastly, just to show how persistent sin can be, there is an equal sin in helping others.

Submission to Unjust (or perhaps Foolish) Authority and the Lockdown Order

16 Saturday May 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Peter, Apologetics, Culture, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

1 Peter, authority, Government, Justin Martyr, Lockdown, Sin, Submission, Thomas Brooks

How seriously should I take the lockdown orders from my county? How seriously should I consider the consequence of disregarding the orders? Is it a trivial matter? It is there any real sin at stake?

[First caveat: I am considering a mere disregard for the law — not appropriate challenges to the law. There are a number of appropriate challenges to a law. For instance, a lawsuit against the local authority on the grounds that the law in question is unconstitutional on equal protection for first amendment grounds would not be disregard of the law. Petitioning the local authority to revise the law would not be disregard.

[Second Caveat: There is a moral case to be made against the law on the economic cost. There could even be a case to be made that in some circumstances, disregard of the law is necessary to preserve life. The moral case would require a different analysis and presents different consideration.]

The easiest way out would be merely to say this is no big deal. And perhaps as an ultimate matter, the stakes are inconsequential and no one will be immediately hurt by disobedience. But that decision was not given to me to make. First, I am not tasked with the civil authority to make such a decision. Second, there is plain direction from Scripture on my duty to obey the law. So, I cannot merely say this is at most a “little sin” (I will come back to this point, below.)

Let us assume for the sake of argument that the lockdown orders are unfair, poorly conceived and poorly executed. What is my responsibility as a Christian?

As an American, ignoring leaders and laws I dislike seems like a fundamental right. “Don’t Tread on Me” is in the history of the country. To be submissive to authority sounds like weakness or foolishness.

There is also the innate human desire for autonomy. When we first come into this world, we come as tyrants demanding submission from all whom come near.

And so adhering to rules which I think are foolish or wrong makes me feel like a sucker. Why would I willingly surrender any authority to the petty tyrants who see fit to control my life?

And so, the wisest response seems to be to just disregard the rule when it seems overwhelming ridiculous.

In addition, when the rule sees ridiculous or unwarranted, the easiest understanding of the rule is that is simply too silly to be obeyed.

In the instance of the lockdown, the stakes are ostensibly life-and-death. Whether the rules instituted actually will help in that regard; and whether the threat is actually life and death (or at least sufficiently dangerous that extraordinary measures are needed). Thus, the concern is extreme; even if the means to protect against that concern are absurd.

Perhaps it will be learned that the lockdown regime was as effective as smoke was in protecting against the Black Plague.

So for argument’s sake let us stipulate that the rules are somewhere between non-effective to excessively restrictive. Perhaps the rules are brilliant, but the argument will be clearer if the rules are simply wrong.

And so, may I disregard laws which I think are foolish, ineffective, or annoying? My political instincts and education and the default positions of Americans (as is readily apparent from both sides of the aisle, depending upon the ruler and the law) is that I may and perhaps should disregard the dumb laws – or at least laws I dislike.

That is one side of the argument, but I don’t believe it can be supported from the Scripture.

In First Peter, the apostle begins a long discussion of submission in verse 13 of chapter two. The general rule is given in verse 13,

1 Peter 2:13–14 (ESV)

13 Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

The command is exceedingly clear: submit, put yourself in subjection to the authorities.

As Paul writes in Romans 13, all governmental authority has been instituted by God. Rom. 13:1. It is sufficient to observe that Peter and Paul both set down this rule with respect to a government which condemned both Peter and Paul to death:

Nero was emperor when St. Peter wrote. Christians were to obey even him, wicked tyrant as he was; for his power was given him from above, as the Lord himself had said of Pilate

H. D. M. Spence-Jones, ed., 1 Peter, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 73. Unless some other rule specifically makes for an exception, this rule stands absolute.

And yes there is an exception to the law: the government has no right to make us sin. The example of Daniel continuing to pray even when the law forbade his prayers is the right example. Daniel prayed despite the law; and Daniel accepted the consequence of his disobedience.

The command is quite clear, and so is the rationale, “For the Lord’s sake.” There are two aspects of this rationale. First, our obedience to a governmental authority “for the Lord’s sake” is ultimately obedience to the Lord. This aspect is made plain in verse 16:

1 Peter 2:16 (ESV)

Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God.

Our obedience to the authority is not because we consider our primary allegiance to that authority: we are free people. But our freedom also makes us servants of God. Or as the NASB has it “bondslaves of God.” The Christian is absolutely bound to the direction of Christ. And thus, if the Lord has given a command, we have no discretion in the matter. [An issue in the lockdown order is whether the stay home orders conflict with a duty to corporate worship.]

This leads to the rationale for obedience found in Paul. As he explains in Roman, obedience to the authority is grounded on the proposition that God has instituted the authority.

Peter, however, adds an additional rationale: as a witness to the authorities and to the world.

In verse 15, Peter writes:

1 Peter 2:15 (ESV)

For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.

Peter’s concern is for the public witness of the Christian. This is a thought that goes back to verse 12:

1 Peter 2:12 (ESV)

Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

The “Lord’s sake” of verse 13 is the public demonstration that we willing lay down even our freedom for the sake of something more important, our testimony that our concern is God’s glory “on the day of visitation.”

The concept here is that by our obedience to human authority, we remove any ground that anyone could speak ill of our behavior.

Peter’s point is that Christians are called upon to be as obedient to the government as possible so as to remove any argument against Christ:

By submitting to government, Christians demonstrate that they are good citizens, not anarchists. Hence, they extinguish the criticisms of those who are ignorant and revile them. Such ignorance is not innocent but culpable, rooted in the foolishness of unbelievers.

Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, vol. 37, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 130. As Christians we are called upon to willingly set aside ground for disobedience to governing authorities because have a duty to remove any possible ground for anyone to speak ill of us.

Do I really want to violate an inconvenient law if the effect would be give anyone a reason to slander Christ?

If we Christians are hated, then we must not be hated because we have disobeyed the authorities. If we suffer, then let us suffer as a Christian for being a Christian:

1 Peter 4:14–15 (ESV)

14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. 15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler.

To underscore and explain his point concerning obedience to authorities Peter sets out a series of examples. First, he speaks of slaves who are mistreated, even physically beaten for unjust cause:

1 Peter 2:18–20 (ESV)

18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. 19 For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. 20 For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.

Notice how Peter describes the master: “unjust” (NASB, “unreasonable”). The suffering is “unjust”. The result is a “beating.” The cause of the beating is having done “good.” The slave did what was “good” and was beaten by an unjust master.

The slave is called upon to endure the beating in patience, “because this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.”

The second example given is Christ suffering unjustly. Christ did not revile when he was reviled (1 Peter 2:23). Rather, Christ turned the response over to God:

1 Peter 2:23 (ESV)

When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.

In verse 21, Peter specifically says that Christ has given us an “example” which we are required to follow.

Peter then gives a third example, a wife being “submissive” to an unbelieving husband. The position of a woman in the ancient world was very difficult. Peter specifically mentions that she is to be submissive to her husband (the same command given to all and to slaves with their own masters) and do so without fear of “anything that is frightening.” (1 Peter 2:6). These are very hard words.

Why is the wife called upon to engage in such extraordinary conduct? To “win” her husband:

1 Peter 3:1 (ESV)

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives,

The demand being made upon Christians is extraordinary. It by nature unreasonable and at times even dangerous. Why would Christians lay aside their defense? For the Lord’s sake. We are called upon to suffer injustice so that none may have a cause to speak against our Lord.

Before going further, someone could say that bearing up under unjust or difficult orders is one thing, but dealing with silly or foolish orders is quite another. There are three responses to this. First, if we must maintain our submission even when being beaten for doing good. If we must do the greater thing, then we must do the lesser.

Second, this makes the bad testimony even worse: you are willing to disobey on the slightest cause. You have must have a very low regard for those in authority.

Thomas Brooks in his Precious Remedies for Satan’s Devices list as device number three of Satan, “extenuating and lessening the sin.” To bring us to sin, the Devil tells us the sin is a very small thing. He makes a number of points about small sins, such as the fruit in the garden may seem a very small sin; small sins lead to greater sins; a small hole can sink a great ship; many saints have suffered death rather than commit the smallest sin, such as just offering up a pinch of incense upon a pagan altar.

Speaking of refusing to follow because the law is so silly, “That it is sad to stand with God for a trifle.” If this thing is so small and insignificant, then it is especially foolish to refuse to obey. For instance, the lockdown does not require heroic acts; it is merely very inconvenient. And yes there are very serious economic issues for many people, but that is a different argument than the law is silly.

Two more that bear consideration: Your soul cannot stand the weight of guilt which is inherent in even the smallest sin. Nothing less the death of Christ was necessary to preserve you from the guilt of this “small sin”. If God were to set the full weight of this guilt upon your soul and you were to understand it aright, it would put you into a horror of madness.

Also, “there is more evil in the least sin than in the greatest affliction.” If it is a sin, then it is inherently worse than death itself.

And lest you think that perhaps I am seeing something new, the Venerable Bede in 7th Century England wrote:

This there is the praise which good men receive, when they act properly and obey the king’s servants, even when it means putting up with ignorance of unwise governors.

As he notes, there is no, but my governor is a fool exception to the rule.

In the Second Century, Justin writing to the Roman Emperor sought clemency for Christians. In his argument, Justin explained – based upon these propositions in Peter and Paul – that Christians were the best of citizens:

And more than all other men are we your helpers and allies in promoting peace, seeing that we hold this view, that it is alike impossible for the wicked, the covetous, the conspirator, and for the virtuous, to escape the notice of God, and that each man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to the value of his actions. For if all men knew this, no one would choose wickedness even for a little, knowing that he goes to the everlasting punishment of fire; but would by all means restrain himself, and adorn himself with virtue, that he might obtain the good gifts of God, and escape the punishments. For those who, on account of the laws and punishments you impose, endeavour to escape detection when they offend (and they offend, too, under the impression that it is quite possible to escape your detection, since you are but men), those persons, if they learned and were convinced that nothing, whether actually done or only intended, can escape the knowledge of God, would by all means live decently on account of the penalties threatened, as even you yourselves will admit. But you seem to fear lest all men become righteous, and you no longer have any to punish. Such would be the concern of public executioners, but not of good princes.

Justin Martyr, “The First Apology of Justin,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 166.

We Christians obey the laws because we are concerned the judgment of God – not the judgment of the king. You have nothing to fear from Christians, we are your best of servants.

The importance of obedience to the civil authorities – even bad civil authorities – as a means of testimony, and the willingness to accept the consequences for disobedience when to obey would be sin, was eloquently stated by Pastor Wang Yi of the Early Rain Church in China in a statement released after his imprisonment:

As a pastor, my firm belief in the gospel, my teaching, and my rebuking of all evil proceeds from Christ’s command in the gospel and from the unfathomable love of that glorious King. Every man’s life is extremely short, and God fervently commands the church to lead and call any man to repentance who is willing to repent. Christ is eager and willing to forgive all who turn from their sins. This is the goal of all the efforts of the church in China—to testify to the world about our Christ, to testify to the Middle Kingdom about the Kingdom of Heaven, to testify to earthly, momentary lives about heavenly, eternal life. This is also the pastoral calling that I have received.

For this reason, I accept and respect the fact that this Communist regime has been allowed by God to rule temporarily. As the Lord’s servant John Calvin said, wicked rulers are the judgment of God on a wicked people, the goal being to urge God’s people to repent and turn again toward Him. For this reason, I am joyfully willing to submit myself to their enforcement of the law as though submitting to the discipline and training of the Lord.

At the same time, I believe that this Communist regime’s persecution against the church is a greatly wicked, unlawful action. As a pastor of a Christian church, I must denounce this wickedness openly and severely. The calling that I have received requires me to use non-violent methods to disobey those human laws that disobey the Bible and God. My Savior Christ also requires me to joyfully bear all costs for disobeying wicked laws.

But this does not mean that my personal disobedience and the disobedience of the church is in any sense “fighting for rights” or political activism in the form of civil disobedience, because I do not have the intention of changing any institutions or laws of China. As a pastor, the only thing I care about is the disruption of man’s sinful nature by this faithful disobedience and the testimony it bears for the cross of Christ.

As a pastor, my disobedience is one part of the gospel commission. Christ’s great commission requires of us great disobedience. The goal of disobedience is not to change the world but to testify about another world.

When placed in the matrix of life of the apostles and martyrs, when measured against the life of men like Wang Yi, our rebellion against inconvenient orders seems terribly misplaced.

Rieff, The Triumph of the Therapeutic, Chapter 2.1 (Discipleship and Therapy)

21 Tuesday Apr 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Apologetics, Biblical Counseling, Freud, Theology of Biblical Counseling, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Biblical Counseling, Freud, Integration, Presuppositional apologetics, Rieff, The Triumph of the Therapeutic, Theology of Biblical Counseling

Chapter Two

The Impoverishment of Western Culture

There is an implicit claim here that symbols function as a mechanism by which a culture gains ascent over the various individuals in the culture: the means by which the superego functions. A curious question which is left unanswered is “Why symbols?”

We could argue that symbols point to the transcendent, but a proposition of Freud must be that there is no real transcendent. Why then any sort of desire or inclination in that direction? That is left unanswered. We simply learn that Freud provides us a mechanism to strip out the symbols.

We then learn that essentially Western Culture developed by means of suppressing sexual desire. (40) The control over sexual desire was the high water mark of character.

Since there is no objective morality, only pragmatics, there is no particular need for such suppression except in and so far as it is functional for the culture.

On an aside, I have noticed that the treatment for “sexual addiction” is distinction amoral in this regard. The problem is not whatever inclination, but rather whether there are negative consequences for following such an inclination.

There is an unstated morality which is present in this: Desires are inherently good. That is a moral equation in the guise of amorality. But if it were truly amoral there would be nothing better about indulging or refraining. Moreover, personal happiness could not be relevant, because anyone else’s concern for your well-being is also irrelevant. In short, the moral question is really not as absent as some pretend. It is always there; the difference is where does not draw a line?

But back to Freud: The “analytic attitude”, the aim of “therapy” is always at the distinct individual. There is no reason to “cure” any sort of desire; because what makes Mr. X happy is necessarily good. “Well-being is a delicate personal achievement”. (41)

This is taken as an ethical demand upon “therapy”. We start with the idiosyncratic evaluation of the patient and seek to assist in achieving that end.

That is fundamentally antithetical to the Christian demand. In Matthew 28, Christ places a solitary command upon the Church: “make disciples”. The process of disciple making is “teach the to observe all that I have commanded.”

Now one can reject the proposition that Christ spoke or that Christ spoke these words. That is an honest position, and the position of Freud, for instance. But for one to claim to be a “Christian” and also take a position that Freud has a contribution on this issue is perplexing.

The position of the Scripture is not terribly confusing. Yes, there can be knotty issues, but those are not the main. The center of the road is abundantly clear.

What is confusing is when someone proposes that there is any sort of integration possible at this key point. No one is contesting the ability of anyone to make observations about the relative frequency of X behavior. But when it comes to this question of the fundamental presuppositions, What is a human being, What is the purpose of a human being, What is necessary for human beings to change: those issues are beyond compromise or “integration”. When we get to presuppositions, those are questions of grammar.

In the English and German language, the sound “gift” has a fundamentally different meaning. In English you get one at Christmas. In German, it is “poison”.

Discipleship and therapy are similar in that both involve words and directions and people who know something is wrong. “Gift” sounds the same in English and German. But O the difference!

As a final note, if you are at all curious about the matter of the importance of “presupposition”, I must direct you to my brothers at:

Domain for Truth: https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com

Paul Baynes, Brief Directions Unto a Godly Life, Chapter Seventeen

09 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Paul Baynes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Peter 1:17, 1 Thessalonians 5:18, 1 Thessalonians 5:19, 1 Timothy 5:10, 1. Thessalonians 5:16, 2 Corinthians 1:12, 2 Samuel 15:26, 2 Thessalonians 3:5, 2 Timothy 4:5, 4:2; Hebrews 3:14, Acts 24:16, Acts 24:16 & 24:7, Acts 26:7 2 Corinthians 1:13., Acts 2:38, Acts 2:46, Brief Directions Onto a Godly Life, Deuteronomy 5:29, Ephesians 4:26; Job 1:5, Galatians 6:16, Hebrews 3:12, Hebrews 3:13, Hosea 14:2-3, James 1:5; 2 Chronicles 20:34; Lamentations 3:27, James 2:23. In afflictions, James 5:13, Joshua 1:8, Lamentations 3:23, Luke 1:75, Luke 9:23, Matthew 26:41, Paul Bayne, Paul Baynes, Philippians 4:4, Proverbs 10:9, Proverbs 21:14, Proverbs 28:13, Proverbs 4:26, Proverbs 4:8., Proverbs 6:22, Proverbs 8:33, Psalm 103:3, Psalm 118:7, Psalm 119:164, Psalm 119:9, Psalm 119:97, Psalm 145:2, Psalm 32:6, Psalm 55:16, Psalm 5:3, Psalm 91:15

The previous post in this series may be found here: http://wp.me/p1S7fR-24t

CHAPTER SEVENTEEN: DIRECTIONS FOR THE WEAK CHRISTIAN

Now that a believer is defined, the godly life described, and the helps thereto adjoined, it remains in the next place to direct the weak Christian in the right use of means. For those duties of godliness are not left to men sometimes to be practiced and at other times neglected; nor are means to be only used generally but not particularly; means must be used daily and throughout each day. This does not mean that one must do the same things every day, but rather that all evil should be avoided every day; and such good done every day as in our calling and life shall be occasioned.

Daily Intake of God’s Word

First, therefore, the believer must have direction for his life every day out of God’s Word. 1 Peter 1:17, 4:2; Hebrews 3:14, Luke 1:75.

a. The Scripture commends us to a certain course of walk in with God and a particular direction of our lives. Psalm 119:9, Proverbs 10:9, Galatians 6:16. This must be kept and daily followed by us. Proverbs 21:14, 1 Timothy 5:10, Psalm 119:97, Psalm 91:15, Acts 24:16 & 24:7, Psalm 145:2. Therefore, Christians must be guided by some daily directions in the leading of their lives.

b. Furthermore, many parts of a daily direction as will sufficiently direct a man are found enjoined in the Word of God; these instructions are be used daily. In prosperity, James 5:13, 1 Thessalonians 5:19, James 2:23. In afflictions, James 1:5; 2 Chronicles 20:34; Lamentations 3:27, Psalm 32:6, 2 Samuel 15:26, Luke 9:23, Deuteronomy 33:12, Matthew 26:41. Among the helps for prayer, Psalm 55:16, Psalm 119:164, Proverbs 6:22. For watchfulness, Psalm 119:97. For reading, Joshua 1:8. And as for public hearing, Proverbs 8:33, Acts 2:46.

c. Besides, if we consider the danger that follows the neglecting of this direction, by taking unlawful liberty, that there will be reason to stir us up to embrace this truth; for, first we are caught presently with the deceitfulness of sin some way or other. Matthew 26:41, Hebrews 3:13, 2 Timothy 4:5, Proverbs 28:13.

God Corrects

Secondly, God himself though he keeps his children from many evils while they desire it, yet if they be secure, he leaves them to themselves does punish their sin as he does other men’s. 2 Samuel 7:1,; 2 Chronicles 16:9, Proverbs 10:9, Psalm 89:3. And we all know that Satan watches for any opportunity to hurt us. Matthew 13:44, Matthew12:44.

Rise When You Fall

That this daily direction is the best means to keep us well – while we are well—and to raise us up when we fall.

Daily Care

That the very Ten Commandments teach us daily exercise. Three commandments make mention of particular days; and the commandments are generally applicable on all days.

No Time to be Careless

God has forbidden us to consider any day’s time for which we may be careless. Galatians 4:10, Colossians 2:16, Hebrews 5:8.

Our Citizenship is in Heaven

And lastly, that our whole daily conversation must be in heaven Philippians 1:27 & 3:20.

Take Care

Therefore, as a man that has a long journey to travel will not count it sufficient to merely notice whether he is going east or west, but rather will take particular note of the way; so ought we to learn wisdom since we have a long pilgrimage. We must not content ourselves with generalities, but rather we must pay attention to the particular means – which may help us forward in the kingdom of heaven.

CHAPTER EIGHTEEN: THE CHRISTIAN LIFE MUST BE LIVED EVERY DAY

Now it follows to show what is daily direction is. It is to gather together certain rules are God’s Word, that which we may be enabled every day according to the will of God with sound peace.

There are the following of such direction as they will and constant effort to please God in all things every day as long as we are to the peace of our own conscience and glorifying of God. And the description is to be observed:

That it is called an endeavor only, because perfection is neither required of God nor to be looked for in the best Christians. Thus such places as, Psalm 119:1, Luke 11:28, which to require perfection are to be expounded by those that speak of endeavor, such as, Chronicles 28:7, Hosea 6:3, acts 24:16. But this is an inseparable fear of the fear of God, and must be in our hearts continually.

That this endeavor must be hearty, not constrained or hollow, but constant, that we faint not, but hold out therein.

Whereto it tends, viz, to please God in all things. Luke 16:13, Colossians 1, Hebrews 13:18.

Lastly, that this must be daily and continued to the end. Acts 24:16, Proverbs 4:26, Acts 26:7 2 Corinthians 1:13.

The Ncessary Parts of Daily Directions are These Eight.

1. First every day we should be humbled for our sins, as through due examination of our lives by the law of God we shall see them. Psalm 5:3, Ephesians 4:26; Job 1:5.

2. Every day we ought to be raised up in assured hope of forgiveness: of them by the promises of God in Christ; this is never separated from the former, Acts 2:38, Hosea 14:2-3. The words “this day” in the Lord’s Prayer teach us at least this much.

3. Every day we ought to prepare our hearts to seek the Lord still and keep them fit ndnd willing thereto. Hebrews 3:12, Deuteronomy 5:29, Proverbs 4:8.

4. Every day we must strongly and resolutely arm ourselves against all evil and sin, fearing most of all to is offend God.

5. Every day we must nourish our fear and love of God and joy in him more than in anything and endeavor to please him in all duties as occasion shall be offered. 2 Thessalonians 3:5.

6. Every day our thanks be for benefits received and still certainly hoped for. Lamentations 3:23, Psalm 118:7, Psalm 103:3, 1 Thessalonians 5:18.

7. Every day we ought to watch and pray for steadfastness and constancy in all these Ephesians 1:17.

8. Every day hold and keep our peace with God, and so lie down with it. 2 Corinthians 1:12, Philippians 4:4, 1. Thessalonians 5:16.

These are all necessary, as without which we can never be safe, we could never taste of true joy. But here are two extremes to be avoided in conceiving [thinking about] of them.

First, that we think it not sufficient to regard these duties, some one time in the day; for we must have this present with us, and our hearts seasoned with them throughout the day. Second, that we do not take occasions from hence to shake off our callings, or to neglect any part of them. For in our ordinary and meanest [least important] works, we may and must serve God by doing them in faith, not for carnal respect only: and avoiding the common sins that profane ones join with them.

Why Would the State Seek to Regulate Biblical Soul Care?

04 Saturday Apr 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Biblical Counseling, Counseling and Legal Issues, law

This is the introduction to a lecture which I will be giving at the ACBC Conference this fall . Since this is an early draft, some or all of this may be rewritten, revised, or simply rejected. But I often think things through by writing them out. Since this is a draft, if you do happen to have an opinion, I would be happy to hear it so that I can make the necessary changes.

The answer to this question will be a bit complex, for two reasons. First, the question concerns the interaction of law and religious practice. Second, the culture as a whole is the process of a fundamental shift; and, as the culture shifts so does the law. Therefore, to answer this question I will need to build an argument in sections, block-by-block.

The Quick Answer

There is an easy answer to this question; it is unpacking the elements which will take time. The State seeks to regulate Biblical Soul Care, because we look like Cognitive Behavioral Psychologists who use religious language for certain predetermined ends. We are just scoff-laws who simply refuse to take the licensing examination and abide by the agreed-upon ethical standards.

The State is completely unconcerned with the fact that we use the Bible, call ourselves Christian, ask people to pray or any similar aspect of our counsel. As I was preparing for this lecture, I read a blog entry on Scientific American concerning the use of tarot cards and astrology as the basis for psychotherapy.

The author plainly favors what he labeled “evidence based” therapies of the more traditional form. And yet ended with the following observation:

Research into the brain and mind, I have argued on this blog and elsewhere, has yet to produce truly persuasive theories of and treatments for mental illness. As a recent essay in a British psychiatric journal argues, “it is still not possible to cite a single neuroscience or genetic finding that has been of use to the practicing psychiatrist in managing [mental] illnesses despite attempts to suggest the contrary.”

This failure helps explains why people still turn to Freudian psychoanalysis, although it does not stand up to scientific scrutiny, and to an even older mind-therapy, Buddhism. And it explains why many people in distress turn to astrology, tarot cards and other pseudoscientific methods. May they find the solace they seek.[1]

But rather than dunk on our psychiatrist friends, I wish rather to make another point. A perfectly reputable psychiatric source is willing to accept – at least tolerate – the use of pseudoscience in the practice of psychotherapy. If you read the post yourself, you can find citations to other reputable practitioners who are willing to permit the use of admittedly unscientific methods because merely being convinced that it will help is usually enough to bring some relief.

Therefore, if you want to talk about Jesus and prescribe a course of prayer, you are free to do so. But, we only ask that you get a license first.

And in a world where hairdressers need official training and an occupational license, we should not be surprised that something as significant as dealing the human heart requires some standard.

Thus, we should not be surprised that the State would seek to regulate therapists no matter what they use as the basis for their therapy. And so, if a pastor wants to preach and pray and engage in rituals, he may. But -as the representative of the State will say -if that same man wants to start engaging in therapy, he should be regulated. He can engage in his religion without a license; but therapy, that is for the State to regulate.

[1] John Horgan, “Astrology, Tarot Cards and Psychotherapy,” Scientific American (blog), February 24, 2020, https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/astrology-tarot-cards-and-psychotherapy/.