# What’s Wrong With “Biblical Patriarchy”? From The Aquila Report.



## earl40 (Jun 10, 2015)

I thought this was pretty good, and has a good nuanced overall view.

If you get some time a penny for your thoughts on the article.

http://theaquilareport.com/whats-wrong-with-biblical-patriarchy/


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jun 10, 2015)

Without having devoted any particular study to the issue, i find myself in agreement with the article. It was well written and made some very good points. In addition, I am usually suspect of anything Doug Wilson is promoting. LOL.


----------



## earl40 (Jun 10, 2015)

Jimmy the Greek said:


> Without having devoted any particular study to the issue, i find myself in agreement with the article. It was well written and made some very good points. In addition, I am usually suspect of anything Doug Wilson is promoting. LOL.



A penny is in the mail.


----------



## KMK (Jun 10, 2015)

This blog post is from 2013. Vision Forum is gone. Wilson has admitted guilt and, according to him, is living a quiet life of repentance. Those tenets which are mentioned in the blog post are no longer a part of Vision Forum's confession because Vision Forum no longer exists. Who knows what Doug Phillips confesses today. The most we can say is that at one time, a parachurch organization confessed these things.

That said, the problem with the Biblical Patriarchy movement in general is expressed in tenet 11, which says "Male leadership in the home *carries over* into the church..." The root of the problem is the idea that of the three spheres of life (family, church, and state), the family is superior. It subjugates the church and state to the family, which might have been true of the patriarchs, it is not true of the NT. 

The idea that the structure of the family is foundational to the structure of the church gives rise to some real problems. For example, what do you do with the sacraments? By the logic of Biblical Patriarchy, the headship of the father 'carries over' into the church. Therefore, it should be the father, not the elders, who determines which of his family members receive which sacraments and when. And where does Biblical Patriarchy leave wives with unbelieving husbands and children with unbelieving fathers when it comes to their part in the church?

I agree with the author that it seems to be an 'overreaction' to the prevalence of Egalitarianism in the church. However, at least Biblical Patriarchy approaches the Bible as authoritative and sufficient as opposed to Egalitarianism which tries to explain the Bible away.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 10, 2015)

KMK said:


> Who knows what Doug Wilson confesses today. The most we can say is that at one time, a parachurch organization confessed these things.



You mean Doug Phillips, right? Wilson isn't Vision Forum.


----------



## earl40 (Jun 10, 2015)

KMK said:


> This blog post is from 2013. Vision Forum is gone. Wilson has admitted guilt and, according to him, is living a quiet life of repentance. Those tenets which are mentioned in the blog post are no longer a part of Vision Forum's confession because Vision Forum no longer exists. Who knows what Doug Wilson confesses today. The most we can say is that at one time, a parachurch organization confessed these things.
> 
> That said, the problem with the Biblical Patriarchy movement in general is expressed in tenet 11, which says "Male leadership in the home *carries over* into the church..." The root of the problem is the idea that of the three spheres of life (family, church, and state), the family is superior. It subjugates the church and state to the family, which might have been true of the patriarchs, it is not true of the NT.
> 
> ...



You get 2 shiny pennies.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 10, 2015)

There's a whole host of competing ideas (in any given era) that are promoted as being "biblical," and worthy of your participation. Often of your financial contribution.

We live in an age when a fair number of these ideas are further enforced by burdens of conscience. "This is God's way, believe me; and not doing so is disobedience to me--- er, to God. You can trust me."

Here are a few myths:
1) Schedule feeding your infant will produce godly children
2) School uniforms will produce godly children
3) Christian schooling will produce godly children
4) Homeschooling will produce godly children.
5) Homeschooling using the Xxxxxxx curriculum (only this one) will produce godly children
6) Unschooling will produce godly children
7) Girls wearing dresses will produce godly girls. Oh, go for broke, this behavior will produce godly boys too!
8) Recreating the 1950s culturally and politically will produce a godly society.
9) Recreating the 1850s culturally and politically will produce a godly society.
10) Recreating the 1750s--forget it. Let's just combine Amish ethos, Colonial politics, and Genevan morality, and we'll--hold it, and my electric appliances--and we'll produce a godly society.

"Patriarchy" is going to work for some people. By which, I mean they will be happy for a while living such a way of life as they construct and define by the term. Patriarchy is no more "biblical" than the Amish devotion to "doing things the hard, labor-intensive way" is "biblical." Both methodologies (containing many variations apiece) are descriptive in some sense of the period of prophetic, divine revelation. But of course, they are descriptive of life in old times generally; not only of life under a godly father or the Mosaic social order; but other natural families and non-Israelite societies.

What we find in OT Scripture is God supplying specific correctives of broadly cultural norms for his nationally organized people; and a few house-rules that really set Israel apart from the other nations. These regulations had little other justification than a divine "_because I'm Lord and I said so; I get to dictate your compliance for no more greater purpose than it pleases me and teaches you obedience; it's good for you, says Me._" And a lot of that disappeared with the Old Covenant, thankfully (Act.15:10).

The specific directions we have from God today in NT times are given to his scattered, international church _not for organizing secular society._ But for encouraging godly life under a whole variety culturally normed contexts. The church is going to be different from the people around it. That difference is primarily moral, not different for its own sake, not for the sake of producing a counter-cultural ghetto.

Producing "recipes" for godliness is a profound misunderstanding, not to mention a complete misuse, of the Bible in general and the moral law in particular. It doesn't work, to begin with: "If righteousness could come by the law...." Thinking that one has a turn-key solution--even a 99% or a 75% solution--which, if correctly implemented, will bring joy to the believer (or at least good comfort by grace): here is a species of religion by the numbers. The challenge we have is no more nor less than just fulfilling our devotion to Christ; then Rom.14:4.

I happen to think that simple, uncomplicated, prayerful submission to Christ; obeying so far as grace allows it, but not putting confidence in that obedience; rather trusting in Christ to overcome my inevitable weakness and failure and lack of diligent compliance with even his simple expectations--I have FAITH that God will own my little children for his eternal possessions.

If it is up to me to be a "Patriarch!" in order to have confidence my children will be good, and validate my ministry and my parental trust from God; in order to have the marriage meant for me by God; in order to be a witness to the world--O my heart. Surely: the few, the proud, the Patriarchs. God help me and all the rest.


----------



## KMK (Jun 10, 2015)

VictorBravo said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > Who knows what Doug Wilson confesses today. The most we can say is that at one time, a parachurch organization confessed these things.
> ...



Thank you. I corrected it. We all know what Doug Wilson thinks.


----------



## earl40 (Jun 10, 2015)

Contra_Mundum said:


> I happen to think that simple, uncomplicated, prayerful submission to Christ; obeying so far as grace allows it, but not putting confidence in that obedience; rather trusting in Christ to overcome my inevitable weakness and failure and lack of diligent compliance with even his simple expectations--I have FAITH that God will own my little children for his eternal possessions.
> 
> If it is up to me to be a "Patriarch!" in order to have confidence my children will be good, and validate my ministry and my parental trust from God; in order to have the marriage meant for me by God; in order to be a witness to the world--O my heart. Surely: the few, the proud, the Patriarchs. God help me and all the rest.



Beautiful, absolutely beautiful.

"Though He slay me I will trust in Him"


----------



## Shawn Mathis (Jun 10, 2015)

KMK said:


> This blog post is from 2013. Vision Forum is gone. Wilson has admitted guilt and, according to him, is living a quiet life of repentance. Those tenets which are mentioned in the blog post are no longer a part of Vision Forum's confession because Vision Forum no longer exists. Who knows what Doug Phillips confesses today. The most we can say is that at one time, a parachurch organization confessed these things.



It is true VF and Phillips are gone. But the view he promoted is not. And the twin organization he helped found, the National Center for Family Integrated Churches, was under the exact same board (with Scott Brown on both boards). So, the NCFIC leadership presumably believes the same confession (unless they renounced it somewhere I missed).


----------

