Yes, someone might say. But still. Why you have to use phrases like ‘lumberjack dykes’? It is provocative. Yes, it most certainly is. But the people pretending to be outraged are liars. I put certain things out there as bait, because I know they will take it, and when they take it I have yet another glorious opportunity to not care about their faux-outrage. Look. We just had one of the largest political demonstrations in American history, which consisted of tens of thousands of women in vagina hats. Christians who are concerned about the kind of provocative discourse you can read here — and their anxiety is not faux-anxiety because they have been conditioned too well — need to recognize that they are not living in the world that they think they are living in.
Douglas Wilson
Quotes
@BozT
Anytime a sex offender advocates for a reduction of restrictions, it is not a good sign.
— Boz Tchividjian (@BozT) October 11, 2017
@DianeLangberg
She gets it:
Toleration of sin, pretense, disease, crookedness or deviation from the truth means the system is in fact not the work of God.
— Diane Langberg, PhD (@DianeLangberg) October 10, 2017
@BozT
Institutions that ignore, minimize, or rationalize leaders who use power to wound others are no less responsible for the wounds inflicted.
— Boz Tchividjian (@BozT) October 5, 2017
@DianeLangberg, PhD
Any leader or person with power who does not bend down and bestow dignity is using the power God has given to serve themselves.
— Diane Langberg, PhD (@DianeLangberg) September 28, 2017
“huh?”
At the recent Princeton Regional Conference on Reformed Theology, co-sponsored by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, the speakers who were lined up to ‘share God’s truths from Scripture’ were Dr. Al Mohler (yay) Dr. Don Carson (yay) and Dr. Diane Langberg (huh?).
Douglas Wilson
@DianeLangberg, PhD
Words, position and knowledge are three very common tools used to spiritually abuse another.
— Diane Langberg, PhD (@DianeLangberg) September 28, 2017
“We charge you in the name of the Lord to abhor all forms of ignoring our intentions in what we have set down through dissembling, reinterpretation, dishonesty, relativism, pretended explanations, presumed spiritual maturity, assumed scholarly sophistication, or outright lying. . .”
“With patterns of church order and confessional standards, one of the fundamental requirements of Scripture is honesty (Ex. 20:16). Consequently, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we charge you, the generations who will follow us in this confederation, to submit to the Scriptures with sincere and honest hearts, and to the standards of this confederation as consistent with the teaching of Scripture. When a portion of our order and confession is found to be out of conformity to Scripture, we charge you to amend it honestly, openly, and constitutionally, as men who must give an account to the God who searches the hearts of men. We charge you in the name of the Lord to abhor all forms of ignoring our intentions in what we have set down through dissembling, reinterpretation, dishonesty, relativism, pretended explanations, presumed spiritual maturity, assumed scholarly sophistication, or outright lying, so that the living God will not strike you and your children with a curse. We charge you to serve Him in all diligence and honesty, so that the blessings of the covenant may extend to your children for a thousand generations.”
CREC Constitution (Preamble)
“More on Speech”
More on Speech
Topic: Hamartiology
The apostle Paul took a dim view of dirty talk. In Colossians 3:8 he uses the word aischrologia to prohibit filthy communication. In our previous discussion of this (on Eph. 5:4), we noted that we need to take our directions on this from the robust apostles and not from the prim Victorians. Now where might the line be between speech that one or the other might prohibit? A simple rule that will deal with most of the issues would be this one: avoid all speech that is trying to be dirty in the way prohibited, speech that depends on and needs the shock effect.
Posted by Douglas Wilson — 1/28/2008 12:49:52 PM
“except to the extent the CREC is in fellowship with the one who holds them”
To reapply a comment that the apostle Paul made once, it is my responsibility in representing the CREC not to go beyond what is written. My idiosyncratic doctrinal views are in no way the responsibility of the CREC, except to the extent the CREC is in fellowship with the one who holds them.
Douglas Wilson, CREC Presiding Minister
“a thankless task”
Thanks to the CREC presiding ministers for taking on a thankless task — http://t.co/gsASTVkK6x
— Douglas Wilson (@douglaswils) October 5, 2015
“he should live in such a way as to be accountable to others for his words and actions”
- A godly satirist should be a member of a worshipping community of orthodox and faithful Christians, and he should live in such a way as to be accountable to others for his words and actions. He should not be the sole judge and arbiter of the words that come from his mouth and keyboard.