# I was just persecuted? I think? you can tell me.



## Romans922 (Apr 16, 2009)

Not physically, just for my beliefs. 

How do you respond when someone tells you the following:

"Well your church is basically 'cultic'."

I responded to this, "What do you mean?" Paraphrasing, the man means we don't allow 'special music' (solos, etc.).

You are basically a 'slave-driver'.

I responded to this, "What do you mean?" Paraphrasing, the man means that I believe in headship in my home.

This led into a conversation about women elders/preachers. I know I sin in being a bad head of my house, but 'slave-driver' I have never considered myself.


How would you respond?


----------



## steven-nemes (Apr 16, 2009)

Call him a heretic! It normally works for me...


----------



## Archlute (Apr 16, 2009)

I ignore them. My in-laws, and one very good friend from my past, believe that both the PCA and OPC are 'cultic' all because our churches practice discipline. Anything that strikes against modern notions of the self and freedom are 'cultic'. Too bad that is not a very good dictionary definition...


----------



## Kevin (Apr 16, 2009)

Sounds more like bad manners then persecution to me...

When people make rude comments I think the best plan is to ignore them, at least that is what I tell my kids


----------



## nicnap (Apr 16, 2009)

Generally by telling him that my beliefs and church practices are in line the vast history of the church.

-----Added 4/16/2009 at 09:50:18 EST-----

If my plan A doesn't work, even after I show them...I will usually resort to name calling and every time they try to speak I will just say loudly, "You're wrong!" In just a few tries they won't even have the will to argue.





Kidding, only kidding.


----------



## matt01 (Apr 16, 2009)

Kevin said:


> Sounds more like bad manners then persecution to me...



I was thinking that if that is persecution, you might as well resign from the eldership. Persecution could be much more.

As for the rude comments, it seems that you handled the situation fine. Either answer, or ignore, don't worry too much.


----------



## Scottish Lass (Apr 16, 2009)

Are you interested in explaining your views or just looking for a quick response to the comment that doesn't involve follow-up? The former might be with someone you know well; the latter could apply to an online conversation with a virtual stranger (some pun intended).

If it's the former, have him define cult first, preferably in less than ten words. Work from there. Invite him to worship with you to see it lived out. 
For me, the latter situation looks more like, "I'm sorry you feel that way," but I'm sure someone here far wiser than I will have sage advice.


----------



## TaylorOtwell (Apr 16, 2009)

11Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 
12Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.


----------



## DonP (Apr 16, 2009)

Praise God you got a chance to lay God's truth before another professor. 

Now the holy Spirit has something to work with if He wants. 

I was run out of a man's house with a shot gun once for talking about election with a few high school and college friends just hanging out. 

Those Arminians, converted or not, love their free will decision to save themselves. 
You take that way and some feel they may be going to hell if its not up to their decision. Them's fightin words.


----------



## Marrow Man (Apr 16, 2009)

"Keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong." -- 1 Peter 3:16-17


----------



## Webservant (Apr 16, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...


People who say things like that are seldom looking for intelligent conversation. I don't know that I would engage such a person.


----------



## Rich Koster (Apr 16, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...


What is his background? He sounds liberal, but is he committed to what he says or just looking to argue?


----------



## larryjf (Apr 16, 2009)

I may have picked up on the slavery thing and asked him if he thinks slavery is wrong.
They driven him back to a point where he would have to answer to what his moral standard is, and what he thinks gives him the right to push his personal moral standard on others.


----------



## Scott1 (Apr 16, 2009)

When someone makes an assertion like that, it is reasonable to put the onus back on them.

Ask, "And what is your basis for making that assertion?"

Listen carefully and use it, if they are willing to hear, to illustrate from God's Word something they are not understanding. (Don't merely deny it and try to 'prove' their assertion is false, the burden is on them to show their basis, then engage them politely, biblicaly and trust God for the results. Don't be defensive).


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 16, 2009)

I agree with Rich Brown. I didn't engage, except to ask him to clarify so I actually understood what he meant. This person was not a person I wanted to engage on such topics, not the time nor place. But I obviously did state I disagreed.

Personally about these two things, I believe RPW. I don't believe their should be special music in PUBLIC worship.

As to the other accusation, I believe the husband is the head of the house and should love His wife as Christ loved the Church, by God's grace may we men do able to do that (I sin on this one all the time). I believe Ephesians 5 (1 Peter 3, etc.). I believe I shouldn't lord that over my wife and be insensitive, etc. I am to be gentle towards, caring for, etc. her. 

I believe that is persecution. No not tortured, but yet it is a form, even from one who calls themselves a Christian.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Apr 16, 2009)

I heard they used to whip children that were lazy in learning their catechisms. I like that. I think I would learn even more if I was whipped to encourage me to learn the word as a youth.


----------



## TimV (Apr 16, 2009)

If you're not sure it probably wasn't ;-) Like the crazy lady in the Simpson's who throws cats as everyone. Just an irritant.


----------



## Zenas (Apr 16, 2009)

Friend of mine in law school called me the same thing several times. He also had no response to the arguments I gave for Orthodox Protestantism versus his Evangelical Lutheranism. It's an ad hominem attack.


----------



## Christoffer (Apr 17, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



I would respond like this.

First however, note that he gave his definitions of "cult" and "slave-driver". By his own admission, by "cult" he means that you only allow for certain music and by "slave-driver" he means only that you believe in male headship.

So your respons could be: well, my friend!! If that is *all* you mean by "cult" and "slave-driver" - so what? I gladly admit to these things.

Or do you mean anything _*more*_ by these two terms?

It is clear that he wanted to use loaded words (by redefining their content to fit his agenda) to bully you into a corner. When you made him define his terms this became evident.

The next question is to ask what point he is trying to make, now that he has established the innocent facts that you only allow for certain music and believe in male headship.


----------



## Tim (Apr 17, 2009)

I think the ideal is that you aim to first disarm the person. Get them to put down their sword. This is easier said than done. I am not gifted in this area because I have a tendency to want to defend myself in a way that may not actually be productive in reaching my opponent. 

I think one tip would be to consider people with whom others feel naturally comfortable. The deacon at my home church is such a man - people just don't care to start arguments or fights with him because he is just a nice, friendly guy. I would do well to emulate him when I come against opposition.

Once the person is disarmed, that is, they are no longer "angry" or just "throwing things at you", _then_ you can ask them to clarify. Use questions to probe their reasons for saying what they do. In the original post, it is likely that the aggressor here has misconceptions about worship and family leadership. 

As for suggesting that one _ignore_ such attacks...I don't know. Wouldn't that just allow the misconceptions to continue? Let us be active to engage others who don't understand. 

But we must disarm them first. That is my main point.


----------



## Reformed Thomist (Apr 17, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



I would simply aim to address his errors in a straightforward fashion. Also, as Scott1 said, never underestimate the power of asking "What is your basis for making that assertion?" You will find that, most of the time, people who make these kinds of claims do not possess sufficient evidence to support them. In other words, they are speaking emotionally, not knowledgeably. 

As for being persecuted generally, well, that's par for the course. Chalk it up to ignorance, for they know not what they do.


----------



## PresbyDane (Apr 17, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



If you need to ask then no, you have not been persecuted


----------



## Kevin (Apr 17, 2009)

Brothers, someone disagreeing with you, or criticising you is not persecution!

If we pretend that it is then we mock all of those brave saints that have (and do) face the fires of persecution every day.

People disrespect & reject me *every day* in my "real life" as a salesman. If I thought that they were all "persecuting" me than life would grind to a halt.


----------



## ExGentibus (Apr 18, 2009)

While I do think that that was an unpleasant conversation with a rude person, I agree the term "persecution" would be misused here. A pastor at the church I attend here, who is an American citizen, has encountered endless problems with the immigration office, despite having all the papers and meeting all the requirements. At an appointment with the officers, he spotted a hand written note inside his file that read "Problem: baptist pastor."


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 18, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> "Well your church is basically 'cultic'."
> I responded to this, "What do you mean?" Paraphrasing, the man means we don't allow 'special music' (solos, etc.).
> ...



Wow! It is good that they didn't get into your views on the inspiration of the Bible, abortion, _why_ you don't do special music, homosexuality, church discipline, fencing the table, or your sympathies for John Knox!!! My prediction is that this will continue to become a larger problem in the coming years (partly the result of Obama worldview writ large over the judiciary, partly the inevitable impact of secularization, and partly due to the weakness of the Christian church to resist the encroachments of the culture).


----------



## Geneva (Apr 18, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



You sound like a reasonable guy. You seemed-as far as I can tell-to handle it all quite calmly. I don't know that I would have let him off as easy as you seemed to. Anyway, he seems to need a good old-fashioned Bible thrashing.


----------



## OPC'n (Apr 18, 2009)

Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group.


----------



## Galatians220 (Apr 18, 2009)

It is a fact these days that any church that does not have the words/phrases "casual," "come as you are," "awesome music," "church the way it should be" (or some equivalent), "coffee and doughnuts," etc. somewhere in one of its home page links is popularly recognized as a flat-out cult.  Sadly, this lack of those features is becoming part of the very cultural definition of a cult. Any church that does not ordain women or allow them to hold an office is beyond the pale. Any church that insists on male headship (or the validity and practice of virtually any of the creation ordinances) is, well, we can see what's happening. I do think that a fair amount of unwitting conscription to Gospel-thwarting agendas is occurring among the mainline and other liberal denominations.

I don't respond to folks who accuse me of being in a cult anymore; I've been hearing it for over 15 years. I just smile and stay silent.

The days of us who are RPW-preferent - and our churches - flying under anyone's radar are swiftly coming to an end. We're not being persecuted yet, but we need to acknowledge the direction in which things are heading so that we're not surprised by anything.

Margaret


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Apr 18, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> How would you respond?



 Hit him over the head with my biggest Bible!




kidding......

Ignore him. No sense arguing with such a person. Nothing irritates the self-righteous any more than being ignored.


----------



## Jon 316 (Apr 19, 2009)

Scott1 said:


> When someone makes an assertion like that, it is reasonable to put the onus back on them.
> 
> Ask, "And what is your basis for making that assertion?"
> 
> Listen carefully and use it, if they are willing to hear, to illustrate from God's Word something they are not understanding. (Don't merely deny it and try to 'prove' their assertion is false, the burden is on them to show their basis, then engage them politely, biblicaly and trust God for the results. Don't be defensive).



Scott, do you mind unpacking this a bit? There is something really good in what you are saying here that I think I could benefit from.


----------



## DonP (Apr 19, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



Hey I get treated worse here on the PB for holding my historic church views.


----------



## Paul (Apr 29, 2009)

I know how you feel brother. At least you're blessed that you belong to a church that shares your beliefs. Unfortunately, I belong to a liberal PCA church in northern California. My pastor won't teach the Reformed faith because he thinks it's polorizing. When I have tried to share with him my concerns, he gets very angry. He also refers to other Reformed churches and even many in the PCA as 'cultic.'


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Apr 29, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> 
> ...



If he is a professing believer, then ask him if he believes the Bible is the inspired word of God? Then ask him if he agrees with Jesus, that whoever loves him must keep his commands. Then say, "that's all I'm trying to do." Jesus in his great wisdom as Creator and Redeemer, commands me to do these things, and I love him, so I do them. I understand that my Creator and Redeemer knows better how I should live. I lead my wife by serving her as God directs me. I forbid the traditions and commandments of men in our worship, because I love God's people and cannot bind the conscience of any man to my own opinions but can only command of them what God commands and nothing more. 

Then after defending your hope, challenge him gently, why he is a member of the secular cult, why he embraces the spirit of the age, why he is so intolerant of those who disagree with modern egalitarian myths, by calling people who disagree with him cultists and slavedrivers. By what standard does he judge when he rejects the Bible? What gives him the right to judge you and impose his opinions on you?


----------



## Craig (Apr 29, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> 
> How do you respond when someone tells you the following:
> I responded to this, "What do you mean?" Paraphrasing, the man means that I believe in headship in my home.
> ...



Initially, it appears this guy was just throwing out things hoping that it would stick.

I'm not sure how I would have responded in *that* situation...but I would consider saying this if it fit naturally in the conversation:
"Do you follow the lead of your children? I don't mean do you let them make choices now and again. I mean on the big stuff: when it comes to your career...where you live....where you worship...when it comes to doctrinal beliefs: Do you follow your children?"

If not, why not? Are you a slave driver because you do not follow your children (or grandchildren)?

Obviously we both would agree in order...now why is order derived from male headship, which is also reflected as an eternal ordinance by the fact we are identified in Christ for redemption, cultish vs a worldly order that reverses the chain of command and disconnects the sinner from his only source of righteousness?

Who's the cruel slave driver: the one leading to heaven, or the one leading to hell?


----------



## BG (Apr 29, 2009)

I


----------



## nasa30 (Apr 29, 2009)

WDG said:


> I don't think that it is persecution.
> 
> You might get the same treatment/opinion (from the session) in a lot of PCA or SBC Churches.



Right you are Bill. I can testify to the SBC view of headship. It is a sad state when culture trumps the Biblical standards


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 29, 2009)

PeaceMaker said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> > Not physically, just for my beliefs.
> ...



Which views are those?


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 29, 2009)

WDG said:


> I don't think that it is persecution.
> 
> You might get the same treatment/opinion (from the session) in a lot of PCA or SBC Churches.



Question: How is this not an example of persecution?

"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."


----------



## BG (Apr 29, 2009)

.


----------



## Romans922 (Apr 29, 2009)

WDG said:


> I see it as a difference of opinion. Their are people on the PB and in the PCA who do not share your view and yet they are Christians and Orthodox.
> 
> Please don't misunderstand me, I agree with you on those issues.
> 
> ...



Well, if I am right (obviously I think I am, but if I am) then it would be a righteous belief, a righteous act. And thus be persecution. I don't believe persecution is necessarily limited to those outside the Church. Maybe I'm wrong, I haven't studied persecution too much unless it had to do with Christ. Insults seem to be a good indicator of persecution in that instance though. 

If a session member shared a differing opinion on headship or RPW in our church? Then it wouldn't be good. The members of my session hold to both of those subjects very firmly. Anyone other officers to be added would have to hold to those as well. My case is probably different than most. I have been blessed with the session I have come into.


----------



## Iakobos_1071 (Apr 29, 2009)

I was called a legalist by a reformed sister because of exclusive psalmody. But she didn't even know what legalism was she just thought that I was too strict. LOL


----------

