If we are faithful, we should always examine ourselves to see what progress we’re making. If a lack of growth or progress doesn’t concern us, there is a bigger problem at play. But we shouldn’t be distraught over a perceived lack of growth—many times we recognize how much we’ve changed when we look back to who we were before Christ.

The growth of trees and plants takes place so slowly that it is not easily seen. Daily we notice little change. But, in course of time, we see that a great change has taken place. So it is with grace. (John Owen)
I am not where I thought I would be as a Christian today. When God saved me eight years ago, I intended to be more holy, more Christlike, more godly than I am now. But I’m not. Not by a long shot.
Sometimes I get too angry; other times I’m a little too impatient. On many occasions my sarcasm comes too natural and my cynicism springs forth too often. I don’t love my wife as I should and my love for the Lord wanes far too easily. In short, I’m less godly than I planned to be eight years in.
Wherever you are in your walk with Jesus—whether it’s been a month, a couple years, or decades—I imagine you feel the same way. We all do. We all get discouraged with our progress.
Read More

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Thursday’s vote on the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act” has paved the way for the Supreme Court to overturn the 2015 5-4 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodge and thus return marriage back to the states. These lawmakers have unwittingly created the perfect scenario to fix the mess the Court originally created.”

Although the House passed the “Respect for Marriage Act” with a 258-169 vote that included 39 House Republicans, this action is a strategic blunder by advocates of same-sex marriage. Rather than a victory, the “Respect for Marriage Act” will make easier the argument to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 5-4 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges regarding same-sex marriage.
Three of the five Justices in the slim Obergefell majority are no longer on the Court – Kennedy, Breyer, and Ginsburg. Chief Justice John Roberts issued a stinging dissent. Justice Thomas and Alito also dissented. Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson have since joined the High Court.
Until the passage of the “Respect for Marriage Act,” the biggest hurdle to overturning Obergefell was not on the law but on policy. Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, has no support in the Constitution. Like Roe, Obergefell was “egregiously wrong from the start.” As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent.”
Until now, the biggest obstacle to overturning Obergefell was based on those who relied on the flawed decision to obtain a marriage license. What happens to these licenses? The consequence of overturning Obergefell is now off the table and is no longer a policy reason for upholding the opinion despite that fact it was wrongly decided. Until the decision is overturned, those who obtained licenses will be “grandfathered” in and the licenses will remain valid. However, like abortion, the Supreme Court will return the matter of marriage to the states to decide a state-by-state law going forward. States will then be free to return to their laws prior to 2015 that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
The case involving Kim Davis may be a vehicle to overturn Obergefell. This case is working its way back to the Supreme Court where one of the arguments will be that Obergefell was wrongly decided. Justices Thomas and Alito have already invited future challenges to the 2015 Obergefell marriage case since the decision was never constitutional.
Justice Clarence Thomas (joined by Justice Samuel Alito) wrote that the Supreme Court’s majority decision in Obergefell v. Hodges caused a collision with religious liberty, and the Court must fix it. Four justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, strongly dissented in Obergefell. Justice Alito predicted the opinion would cause significant problems for religious freedom.
Read More
Related Posts:

Hospitality is especially important for elders because their teaching and ruling responsibilities do not necessarily require them, unlike deacons, to be mixing regularly with strangers, the lonely, widows, and the poor. And yet in too many churches pastors and other elders are not expected to exercise hospitality. Now this may be because churches are sensitive to the fact that pastors and their wives have a lot going on. But churches should at least ask about this gift, and seek to pray for and help pastors who are not exercising hospitality or, if necessary, have other elders pick up the slack if the pastoral household is unable to do this work. 

The qualifications for elders in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 mention that for a man to be a minister he must be a one-woman man, be sober-minded, and be self-controlled. In my experience, these and other qualifications are commonly noted in letters of reference for potential pastors. And this makes sense: after all, the Apostle Paul’s inspired letters to pastors put far more emphasis on character and godliness than they do on a candidate’s aptitude to teach.
Nonetheless, there are two packages of pastoral attributes that are not often emphasized by presbyteries or congregations when a man is being examined or called. I am not saying that most ministers do not meet these qualifications, or pastoral attributes. I believe that the vast majority of orthodox ministers do. But I am not sure that churches consistently ask about these qualifications, and I am concerned that presbyteries’ examination of men regarding these qualifications is often insufficient. Perhaps it is time to address both of these when search committees are considering candidates, or when presbyteries are conducting examinations.
First, there is the matter of reputation. Paul twice tells Titus that potential elders must be “above reproach.” This point is repeated in his first epistle to Timothy, to which the Apostle also adds that an elder candidate must be “respectable,” to which he further adds that an elder “must be well thought of by outsiders.” The last requirement is arresting, thought-provoking, and should perhaps be action-provoking. Actually, it seems to me that we need to take these qualifications more seriously than we have in the past and, in order to do so, Presbyterian churches should probably do two things.
On the one hand, we should require all incoming elders to have a letter of reference from an “outsider” – someone who is not a member of a church, and yet who knows the candidate well enough to vouch for his orderly conduct – perhaps a former employer (for a newly minted minister), or a neighbour (for an existing minister moving to a new church). We should ask the man or woman writing the letter of reference to address any concerns that he or she might have; character flaws that could inhibit good leadership; patterns of speech that fall short of the highest moral standards – or positive traits that they think would be an asset. This is not a high bar for a pastor, but if he could not produce such a letter, or it proved to be a hardship for him to do so, it would surely be telling to those seeking to call him.
On the other hand, we should require legal background checks, ensuring that a candidate’s disclosures of any past sins and lapses of judgement are honest and complete, so that any heart-work and repentance that needs to be done is addressed prior to the commencement of a ministry – if, after a careful review, we determine that there can be any ministry at all. Such accountability is no cure-all. But it seems like a must-do.
Second, there is the matter of hospitality. The Bible contains three infallible pastoral epistles and two of them stress that elders be hospitable. In his letter to Titus, Paul places “hospitality” in direct opposition to egotistical sins such as arrogance, quick temper, and greed. There we also see hospitality presented as a leading virtue, listed at the head of a brief catalogue of character strengths, such as the love of the good, self-control and discipline. In his first letter to Timothy, Paul closes his opening list of personal pastoral characteristics with an insistance that the elder be “hospitable.”
It may help to remind ourselves that hospitality is not “entertainment.” Hospitality is done for the good of the guest, not for the fun of the host. Hospitality can involve serving hotdogs; with us it often does. And we are not alone: when we were moving to a new town and didn’t know anyone, a pastor of a large church invited us to his home – for hotdogs.
Read More
Related Posts: