One former moderator of the General Assembly characterized this year as the “Pitchfork Assembly,” because of the outrage in the pews related to some of the events of recent years in the PCA. This is both cause for prayers of thanksgiving (i.e. that people in the churches are willing to sacrifice to send their elders to the Assembly and that God has raised up elders willing to do the work of the church) and prayers for peace (i.e. that God will pour out a spirit of humility and grace even as we contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints so we may be united in truth and love).

This document was prepared for the congregation of First Presbyterian Church in Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia.
As I prepare to attend the Assembly’s meeting in Birmingham this year, I want to apprise you of some of the matters that will be considered so you can be better prepared to pray for me and the other elders as we seek to do the work Christ has called us to do in this Assembly. From our congregation two of our elders have been elected to represent the Session.
If you’d like a quick review of the acts and deliverances of last year’s General Assembly as well as wider context, the preview and report from last year are on the church website: www.fpfo.org/gar.
I. The Year in Review
A lot has happened since last year’s PCA General Assembly in Saint Louis both in the life of the nation of our exile as well as within this small part of Christ’s Kingdom, the PCA. A few items will help set the context for this year’s Assembly and will loom large over it.
A. The Failure to Ratify Overtures 23 and 37
Overtures 23 and 37 were intended to provide further clarity on what it means for officers of the PCA to be above reproach. The amendments would have required Presbyteries and Sessions to examine officer candidates to prevent those who are harboring scandalous sins (e.g. racism, abuse, homosexuality) or maintaining an identity unbecoming of someone in union with Christ (e.g. “Gay Christian”) from being ordained in the PCA.
While a clear majority of the presbyteries voted to ratify the two overtures (63% for O23 and 55% for O37), they fell short of the 67% threshold required for ratification. I discuss more of what this means in this article and why we should be disappointed and concerned by the failure of ratification, but nonetheless I do not think it is reason to give up on the PCA.
B. The Apocalypse of the National Partnership
Last Fall someone released several files containing nine years’ worth of correspondence from a secretive society of elders (mostly teaching elders) within the PCA known as the National Partnership. The files reveal the goals of a more progressive wing of the Assembly and how they have attempted to dilute the PCA’s commitment to Presbyterian distinctives and pave the way for unordained people in leadership by allowing them on permanent committees currently limited only to elders and (in a few cases) deacons.
In November 2021 the Session produced a report examining the activity of the National Partnership; it is available here. If you’d like to read the correspondence that has been made public, you can do so here.
The files also revealed voting guides and attempts to ensure members of the National Partnership were elected to committees of Presbyteries and General Assembly. They also contained tips for newer elders and even a schedule to help their members know when to “SCHEDULE YOUR DRINKING” and when they needed to “be on the floor for those votes” during General Assembly.
The unveiling of these clandestine activities shocked and scandalized many within the denomination so much so that this year’s Assembly is anticipated to be the largest one yet as elders from small churches sacrifice to come out and contend for Christ’s bride against those who seek to weaken our commitment to the Standards.
C. The Denial and Sustaining of Complaints Against Missouri Presbytery (MoP)
As a result of public comments made by “gay pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America” TE Greg Johnson and the Session of Memorial Presbyterian Church (MPC) related to “Revoice 18,” a pair of complaints by TE Ryan Speck were filed against MoP for the way it handled the investigations of both TE Johnson and the Session of MPC. In the complaints, TE Speck argued MoP should have concluded there was a “strong presumption of guilt” regarding TE Johnson for his activities and that MoP should have concluded MPC erred seriously in hosting the Revoice conference.
The Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) denied TE Speck’s complaint (Speck 2) regarding the way MoP investigated TE Johnson’s public statements. This led TE Johnson to claim he was exonerated by the ‘supreme court’ of the PCA. However, TE Johnson was never on trial; only the procedure observed by MoP was assessed by the SJC and only his statements prior to 2020. Additionally, SJC members noted the dangerous way in which TE Johnson has been speaking and writing since that time and strongly cautioned against his “tone-deafness.”
The SJC sustained crucial aspects of TE Speck’s complaint (Speck 1) related to MoP’s investigation of the MPC Session. This will require MoP to conduct a proper investigation regarding the activities of MPC. More on this matter below.
II. Domestic Abuse & Sexual Assault (DASA) Committee
After three years and approximately $30,000, the DASA committee produced a 220-page report aimed to help PCA session and presbyteries faithfully minister to those who are victims of various forms of abuse. Additionally the report offers advice regarding procedures to prevent abuse from taking place within the churches of the PCA.
There are numerous helpful pieces of advice within the report. TE George Sayour has written a helpful analysis, which I commend to you. The report should be received and the committee dismissed at this year’s Assembly.
III. Business of the 49th General Assembly
A. Nominations Committee (NC)
The NC is comprised of a representative from each of the 88 Presbyteries in the PCA. Each year the NC presents a report of recommended elders to staff the permanent committees overseeing the agencies of the PCA as well as the SJC. In addition to candidates from the NC, floor nominees are also permitted.
Read More
Related Posts:

Moment by moment, God answers. This is his daily bread. God shows us the next step, the next right thing to do. He gives us what we need for each conversation, for each moment of suffering, for each anxious thought, for each difficulty that feels overwhelming and beyond what we can bear.

I know God provides, hears my prayers, is powerful to act, gives wisdom and strength, and loves me. I know he gives me the “bread” I need. I trust his baking skills. His loaves are good.
But I don’t like daily bread because I’m impatient. I want all my long-term needs supplied now. I want a year’s supply. Or at the very least, a week’s worth.
The challenges I face overwhelm me. There are areas of my life where I’m not sure I have what it takes. Decisions I’m not sure I have the wisdom for. Leadership I’m not sure I have the gifts for. Fights I’m not sure I have the courage for. Love I’m not sure I have the endurance for.
I want God to take care of all these desires, needs, and fears right now. To lay out every step of the plan for the year. To immediately give some surge of sanctification that fixes all my faults. To offer an upfront payment of provision that lets me know this year, and the next five, will go well.
I don’t want daily installments. I want the whole delivery of his bread to be unloaded from the truck so I can feel secure, ready, and equipped for life now. But in Luke 11, that’s not how Jesus invites us to come. Jesus teaches us to ask for daily bread. He wants us to trust his care and ask for what we need each day. No stockpiling, storing, or saving up necessary.
Come to Your Loving Father
In Luke 11, the disciples observe Jesus praying, and they ask him to teach them to pray. Jesus then gives them (and us) a model for how to relate to God. The prayer begins with “Father.” The entire prayer is rooted in a loving, personal, and covenanted commitment to us from God. Because God is our Father, we can be assured he’s good. In all our struggles, needs, and uncertainties, we can trust him. 
Read More
Related Posts:

You can always find loopholes in language. But I don’t believe there is enough uncertainty to justify the NRSVue’s choice. Out of love for my homosexual neighbors, I must call the NRSVue’s rendering of 1 Corinthians 6 what it is: a removal of something Paul said by the inspiration of the Spirit.

I regularly roll my eyes at English Bible translation freak-outs. I have many times seen Christians hunt for the “errors” in contemporary translations such as the NIV or ESV. Often what they come up with can only be called errors if one views them through malicious eyes and ties them to some concocted narrative of doctrinal downgrade. Our major modern evangelical Bible translations are very good. Not perfect, but very good.
The truth is, our major modern mainline Bible translations are good, too. I think of the RSV from the 1950s, the NRSV of 1989, the CEB of 2011. Though I have less experience with these translations than with the evangelical ones, I feel confident saying they’re produced by serious people who aimed at faithful translation. When I check them, which I have done many times, I repeatedly encounter translation choices that are obviously responsible. I encounter God’s Word. The KJV translators tell us in their famous preface that even the “very meanest” translation of God’s Word is God’s Word. They also tell us to judge Bible translations by their predominant character. They say, “A man may be considered handsome, though he have some warts upon his hand” (my slightly updated translation of their archaic English). And if I make this kind of generous judgment, mainline English Bibles are good.
But sometimes warts can grow rather large. The Revised Standard Version had warts in several passages, especially Isaiah 7:14 (“Behold, a young woman shall conceive. . .”), that have caused most evangelicals to set it aside. Likewise, the freshly published “updated edition” of the New Revised Standard Version (NRSVue) will, I predict, be rejected by today’s evangelicals because of two warts: its renderings of 1 Timothy 1:10 and, especially, 1 Corinthians 6:9–10.
I work hard to make sober judgments about English Bibles, but I’m forced to conclude that the NRSVue has removed two Pauline condemnations of homosexuality—though it has kept other biblical prohibitions of the practice.
Translating 2 Key Greek Words
Here’s how that latter passage reads in the (usually literal and definitely evangelical) New American Standard Bible. I’ve bolded the key words to watch for:
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor those habitually drunk, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9–10)
Those two English words translate two Greek words. The word “effeminate” translates the word malakoi; the word “homosexuals” translates the word arsenokoitai (which appears also in 1 Tim. 1:10).
These two words almost certainly refer to the passive and active partners in a male homosexual pairing. But that doesn’t mean they’re easy to translate. Responsible translations go different ways.
The ESV, CSB, NIV, and NASB 2020 take the two Greek words and turn them into one thing expressed in one phrase: “men who have sex with men” (NIV; CSB has “males”) or “men who practice homosexuality” (ESV). Other translations are more like the NASB, assigning one-word equivalents to each of the two Greek words at issue.
I have studied these two Greek words carefully, and if I had to pick my favorite rendering, the award would go to the Berean Study Bible:
Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts . . .
This is a translation touchdown: accurate and readable.
But the NRSVue doesn’t just punt at 1 Corinthians 6:9; it lies on the field and forfeits the game. Here is its rendering of the passage:
Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex . . .
Paul says that active and passive partners in a homosexual pairing will not inherit the kingdom of God. The NRSVue does not say this. It first, in my judgment, obfuscates matters by including a footnote on malakoi and on arsenokoitai: “Meaning of Greek uncertain.” Then, despite their admitted uncertainty, the NRSVue translates malakoi as something too specific (“male prostitutes”) and arsenokoitai as something too general (“men who engage in illicit sex”). It does the same with arsenokoitai in the one other place it appears, 1 Timothy 1:10, where Paul lists among other sinners.
Read More
Related Posts: