# Christians in name only are greatest enemies to true Christians



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 4, 2019)

Christians in name only are greatest enemies to true Christians, especially to those who will have a church government and worship limited to only what God has prescribed in His Word (to paraphrase ):

"It has ever been the lot of the kirk to be hardest persecuted of her bastard brother. The ten tribes had still a horn in Judah’s side; Samaria was [the] greatest hater of the kirk. And yet these who are Christians by name are greatest enemies to the kirk; false Christians will set against another, but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself. The false apostles were chief persecutors of the true, the Jews against Christ, and still the children of the flesh will persecute the children of the spirit [Gal. 4:29]: Esau against Jacob." David Dickson, Sermon 25, 27 Sermons on Jeremiah's Lamentations. Manuscript sermons forthcoming from Naphtali Press D.V.

Reactions: Like 6 | Amen 2


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 4, 2019)

That is one of the most sobering quotes I have read in a long time.


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

Wow. Satan is really a Counterfeiter.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Dec 5, 2019)

Maybe the quote was true in his day, but nominal Christians are not our *greatest* enemies.


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Dec 5, 2019)

Please elaborate. Those who do not worship or think the way I do, but who are still Christians are not enemies of mine at all. Even those who are luke warm. They aren't hostile in the least bit, though they might not agree with me. They tend to be the ones who push for diversity and acceptance quite strongly.


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

SolaScriptura said:


> Maybe the quote was true in his day, but nominal Christians are not our *greatest* enemies.



I thought the quote referred to false teachers. But reading it again, do you think he means other Christians who differ on the regulative principle of worship? If so, yes, I agree with you. Is David Dickson speaking of false teachers or just errant Christians here?


----------



## ADKing (Dec 5, 2019)

I think the quote is fairly clear in distinguishing "Christians by name" and "false Christians" from true Christians. His examples further illustrate the point by naming people/groups that had a covenant connection but were clearly not believers (like Esau, the Jews who persecuted Christ etc.). There is a hatred on the part of false professors for those who insist on God's way only that is as old as Cain and Abel. (1 John 3.12).

Reactions: Like 5


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

"but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself."

What does this mean? Churches that celebrate Christmas and other "pretended Holy days"? Or the Mass?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Dec 5, 2019)

Regardless, it's stereotypical preacher hyperbole. I disagree with it in our context.


----------



## ADKing (Dec 5, 2019)

Pergamum said:


> "but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself."
> 
> What does this mean? Churches that celebrate Christmas and other "pretended Holy days"? Or the Mass?



The whole portion of that quote is "false Christians will set against another, but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself." I take that to mean that false Christians will fight among each other but their ire is especially aroused by those who remain staunch against any and all innovations/corruptions/syncretism in worship or government. Make what application of that you will--my point isn't to debate Christmas. But those of us who don't celebrate it probably have a few anecdotes that could come to mind

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

ADKing said:


> The whole portion of that quote is "false Christians will set against another, but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself." I take that to mean that false Christians will fight among each other but their ire is especially aroused by those who remain staunch against any and all innovations/corruptions/syncretism in worship or government. Make what application of that you will--my point isn't to debate Christmas. But those of us who don't celebrate it probably have a few anecdotes that could come to mind



Ya, I'm confused by who the intended target of the quote is. But it is powerful. Merry Christmas, brother.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Dec 5, 2019)

ADKing said:


> The whole portion of that quote is "false Christians will set against another, but especially they are set against those who will admit no worship or government in His house but such as are ordained by Himself." I take that to mean that false Christians will fight among each other but their ire is especially aroused by those who remain staunch against any and all innovations/corruptions/syncretism in worship or government. Make what application of that you will--my point isn't to debate Christmas. But those of us who don't celebrate it probably have a few anecdotes that could come to mind


That may be the context, but I don't see anybody making an enemy of me over it. Now if I held my views in the middle of a violent anti-Christian religion, I would surely have enemies.


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 5, 2019)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> That may be the context, but I don't see anybody making an enemy of me over it. Now if I held my views in the middle of a violent anti-Christian religion, I would surely have enemies.


I have experienced hate for not only my EP position, but on second and fourth commandment convictions as well... and these was on a Reformed site by reformed christians.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

Seeking_Thy_Kingdom said:


> I have experienced hate for not only my EP position, but on second and fourth commandment convictions as well... and these was on a Reformed site by reformed christians.



Do you think it was hate or just annoyance?


----------



## SolaScriptura (Dec 5, 2019)

Seeking_Thy_Kingdom said:


> I have experienced hate for not only my EP position, but on second and fourth commandment convictions as well... and these was on a Reformed site by reformed christians.



But do you *seriously* count those expressions of “hate” to be so serious that the ones doing so are your “greatest enemies?”

In a world in which there are people who would gleefully saw off your head, and rape your wife and children and sell them into slavery because of your faith... or others who would happily get you fired from your job and have you branded a bigot and marginalized from all society... I think there are “greater” enemies than other Christians (nominal or otherwise) who don’t like the RPW.

We shouldn't spiritualize what Dickson is saying here, he's not talking about degraded worship and its acceptability to God: he's talking real world tangible enemies who want to destroy you. He was persecuted (and others of his day were so as well) by those in the Established church. In his day in which just about "everybody" was a member of the church, his comments make a lot more sense.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 5, 2019)

Pergamum said:


> Do you think it was hate or just annoyance?





SolaScriptura said:


> But do you *seriously* count those expressions of “hate” to be so serious that the ones doing so are your “greatest enemies?”


It started as a regular discussion, but once I had to start defending my positions it quickly turned into animosity and ridicule that turned to cursing and name calling. This was legitimate hate, not the snowflake, my poor precious feelings kind either. 

To clarify the site did take “Reformed” very broadly, meaning anyone not Catholic is Reformed. I would not expect to be treated like that by confessional brothers, but outside of our circles there is most definitely hate and ridicule.


----------



## Jeri Tanner (Dec 5, 2019)

I would think David Dickson’s thoughts are in reference to Rome, i.e. the false church, which still exists in our day and will always persecute the true, invisible church. He’s not talking about beloved brothers and sisters in Christ who honestly differ on issues like baptism, worship, etc. But seemingly sincere Christians can definitely get vicious with each other over some key doctrinal issues, which should never be.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 5, 2019)

SolaScriptura said:


> In a world in which there are people who would gleefully saw off your head, and rape your wife and children and sell them into slavery because of your faith... or others who would happily get you fired from your job and have you branded a bigot and marginalized from all society... I think there are “greater” enemies than other Christians (nominal or otherwise) who don’t like the RPW.


Well, sure. But is hate the same as persecution? I don’t think so. 


SolaScriptura said:


> he's talking real world tangible enemies who want to destroy you.


If that is what he means by hate then he is talking about Rome.


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

Seeking_Thy_Kingdom said:


> It started as a regular discussion, but once I had to start defending my positions it quickly turned into animosity and ridicule that turned to cursing and name calling. This was legitimate hate, not the snowflake, my poor precious feelings kind either.
> 
> To clarify the site did take “Reformed” very broadly, meaning anyone not Catholic is Reformed. I would not expect to be treated like that by confessional brothers, but outside of our circles there is most definitely hate and ridicule.


Thanks for clarifying. So sorry to hear that. God bless. The worst I would ever do is toilet paper your house.

Reactions: Funny 3


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 5, 2019)

Pergamum said:


> Thanks for clarifying. So sorry to hear that. God bless. The worst I would ever do is toilet paper your house.


It’s fine, it taught me a lot about the internet. Now if people want a good chat or a serious talk they can do so face to face over a good scotch.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 5, 2019)

Seeking_Thy_Kingdom said:


> It’s fine, it taught me a lot about the internet. Now if people want a good chat or a serious talk they can do so face to face over a good scotch.



If you need a good Scot, you would get along well with Groundskeeper Willy, who also hates Easter, Christmas and all other pagan man-made holidays.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1 | Funny 1


----------



## Seeking_Thy_Kingdom (Dec 5, 2019)

Pergamum said:


> If you need a good Scot, you would get along well with Groundskeeper Willy, who also hates Easter, Christmas and all other pagan man-made holidays.


He seems like my kind of guy!

As for the quote, hopefully Chris can clarify... and I am absolutely in no way asking this because I am fishing for more Dickson quotes.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## RJ Spencer (Dec 5, 2019)

SolaScriptura said:


> But do you *seriously* count those expressions of “hate” to be so serious that the ones doing so are your “greatest enemies?”
> 
> In a world in which there are people who would gleefully saw off your head, and rape your wife and children and sell them into slavery because of your faith... or others who would happily get you fired from your job and have you branded a bigot and marginalized from all society... I think there are “greater” enemies than other Christians (nominal or otherwise) who don’t like the RPW.
> 
> We shouldn't spiritualize what Dickson is saying here, he's not talking about degraded worship and its acceptability to God: he's talking real world tangible enemies who want to destroy you. He was persecuted (and others of his day were so as well) by those in the Established church. In his day in which just about "everybody" was a member of the church, his comments make a lot more sense.



Are you suggesting that those doing physical harm are to be taken as my enemy more so than those that seek to do spiritual harm?
Certainly they cannot actually cause spiritual harm, for those that are the elect of God will not "lose their salvation", but they still intend to uproot the true faith.


----------



## RJ Spencer (Dec 5, 2019)

This quote seems to be pretty straight forward to me, I am very surprised by some of the backlash. "Nominal Christians" and false Christians are one in the same. A nominal, Christian in name only, is not a regenerated Christian. I would say though, that the more a nation grows hostile to true Christianity the less and less nominal Christians there will be. Back when I used to preach I would always feel the need to differentiate between real Christians and those nominal/liberal Christians, every single time that I used the term Christian. Of course that was back in my UMC days, I would not have to differentiate the two nearly as much in the OPC.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Dec 5, 2019)

Seeking_Thy_Kingdom said:


> It’s fine, it taught me a lot about the internet. Now if people want a good chat or a serious talk they can do so face to face over a good scotch.


Just not too much scotch. It could get ugly then too

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ryan&Amber2013 (Dec 5, 2019)

RJ Spencer said:


> This quote seems to be pretty straight forward to me, I am very surprised by some of the backlash. "Nominal Christians" and false Christians are one in the same. A nominal, Christian in name only, is not a regenerated Christian. I would say though, that the more a nation grows hostile to true Christianity the less and less nominal Christians there will be. Back when I used to preach I would always feel the need to differentiate between real Christians and those nominal/liberal Christians, every single time that I used the term Christian. Of course that was back in my UMC days, I would not have to differentiate the two nearly as much in the OPC.


I guess I'm just not getting it. In our congregation I would be fairly certain not everyone is born again, but no body hates the pastor or the church. They still are very kind.


----------



## RJ Spencer (Dec 5, 2019)

Ryan&Amber2013 said:


> I guess I'm just not getting it. In our congregation I would be fairly certain not everyone is born again, but no body hates the pastor or the church. They still are very kind.



I believe the quote is regarding those that aggressively call themselves Christians while saying and doing things that would be detrimental to the church. People like Osteen, Hinn, and their followers. What makes them so dangerous is their attempt to do spiritual harm.


----------



## KMK (Dec 5, 2019)

Should we call them "Cinos"?


----------



## earl40 (Dec 5, 2019)

Jeri Tanner said:


> I would think David Dickson’s thoughts are in reference to Rome, i.e. the false church, which still exists in our day and will always persecute the true, invisible church. He’s not talking about beloved brothers and sisters in Christ who honestly differ on issues like baptism, worship, etc. But seemingly sincere Christians can definitely get vicious with each other over some key doctrinal issues, which should never be.



I suspect he is speaking against The Church of England.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Dec 5, 2019)

Sorry; been busy and had not noticed a quote in the daily devotional forum had been controversial. Note the setting, it is 1628 in Scotland. Over the previous generation bishops had been reimposed (unbiblical gov.). 1618 had the imposition of the five articles of Perth (unbiblical worship), nonconformist ministers were persecuted from that point. So the angliocatholic bishops (some of whom were not appointed for or known by their godliness) I think is whom Dickson may have had specifically in mind in his historical context.

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 2


----------

