Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If only we had a prophet and a stone, maybe we could?I surely hope that Samuel never had anybody sing or sermonize around Ebenezer, and that nobody ever went back there for remembrance, corporately or privately.
That would be strange fire or something, so I'm told.
I understand. There is no general equity or principle to be pulled from the actions or role of magistrates and prophets. Everything they did was unique to them and has no bearing on the church.If only we had a prophet and a stone, maybe we could?
Ah, you were squaring up for an argument. I couldn’t quite tell what you meant in your first couple posts but I see now. We’ll as they say, “good luck with that”.I understand. There is no general equity or principle to be pulled from the actions or role of magistrates and prophets. Everything they did was unique to them and has no bearing on the church.
If a magistrate can call a synod as part of his broad mandate in scripture, then he can also name a day or topic of special remembrance.Ah, you were squaring up for an argument. I couldn’t quite tell what you meant in your first couple posts but I see now. We’ll as they say, “good luck with that”.
Let me know your price range and we can work something out. Our most popular model is the granite slab. But if you’re looking for something that’s perhaps a little classier, we also have different colours of marble available. For a limited time, we are offering a 7% discount on Stonehenge miniatures. A very nice addition to any mini-golf course.If only we had a prophet and a stone, maybe we could?
Hmmm, prove this please.If a magistrate can call a synod as part of his broad mandate in scripture, then he can also name a day or topic of special remembrance.
The stones are great, but please sell them with the disclaimer that no one ever sing or preach around them for the RPW sake.Let me know your price range and we can work something out. Our most popular model is the granite slab. But if you’re looking for something that’s perhaps a little classier, we also have different colours of marble available. For a limited time, we are offering a 7% discount on Stonehenge miniatures. A very nice addition to any mini-golf course.
Logic.Hmmm, prove this please.
Oh I’m more worried about finding a prophet tbh. Got any of those?Let me know your price range and we can work something out. Our most popular model is the granite slab. But if you’re looking for something that’s perhaps a little classier, we also have different colours of marble available. For a limited time, we are offering a 7% discount on Stonehenge miniatures. A very nice addition to any mini-golf course.
Yikes. It was a joke.The stones are great, but please sell them with the disclaimer that no one ever sing or preach around them for the RPW sake.
Hmm... I might have a certificate somewhere from my Pentecostal days… Is it all right if it’s signed in crayon?Oh I’m more worried about finding a prophet tbh. Got any of those?
You cannot preach around a stone if scripture did not say you can preach around a stone.Yikes. It was a joke.
And no self-respecting Presbyterian would ever say you can’t preach around a stone. Conventicles and all that.
Is that really as simple as it is? Are there not more layers to this? For instance, December 25th, in many people’s minds, is not an ordinary day. It is, to them, a holy day. Were the magistrate to declare that day a special day of remembrance for the Incarnation, would there not be at least an appearance of association woth idolatry? If yes, it is not “benign” or “indifferent.”Logic.
If they can declare that they church shall address an issue, then they can declare that the church shall remember a thing.
If they can declare the greater, then they can declare the lesser.
It's not all that deep.
Er… Maybe it’s time to review the RPW…You cannot preach around a stone if scripture did not say you can preach around a stone.
The RPW here means you must provide chapter and verse for preaching near a stone, and if it's not there, then you may not preach near a stone.
At least if that stone is to make you remember something.
If it's a random stone, that's fine.
You're simply talking about the wisdom of declaring that day in particular, in this circumstance. That's a far cry from a principled objection. I have no beef with people who allow for the declaration of days, but don't think Christmas is wise. That's fine. But also a totally different topic.Is that really as simple as it is? Are there not more layers to this? For instance, December 25th, in many people’s minds, is not an ordinary day. It is, to them, a holy day. Were the magistrate to declare that day a special day of remembrance for the Incarnation, would there not be at least an appearance of association woth idolatry? If yes, it is not “benign” or “indifferent.”
But, frankly, the magistrate decreeing “a day of remembrance” is not really what’s at issue here.
I agree, but that is the RPW that is usually argued here.Er… Maybe it’s time to review the RPW…
What are you arguing, exactly? Are you saying that a rejection of Christmas amounts to a rejection of the magistrate’s authority to declare a day of remembrance?You're simply talking about the wisdom of declaring that day in particular, in this circumstance. That's a far cry from a principled objection. I have no beef with people who allow for the declaration of days, but don't think Christmas is wise. That's fine. But also a totally different topic.
The problem is when the RPW is weaponized to neuter the magistrate and the elders from declaring a remembrance or topic outside the Lord's Day or normal worship. That's what most anti-Christmas posts here are.
If your arguing for WCF 21:5 that’s great but what does that have to do with Christmas?Logic.
If they can declare that they church shall address an issue, then they can declare that the church shall remember a thing.
If they can declare the greater, then they can declare the lesser.
It's not all that deep.
No, you can reject Christmas for all kinds of reasons and that's cool with me. If you want to call it unwise, that's fine by me.What are you arguing, exactly? Are you saying that a rejection of Christmas amounts to a rejection of the magistrate’s authority to declare a day of remembrance?
Not as far as I can tell.I agree, but that is the RPW that is usually argued here.
The title of the thread speaks to this. The church calendar is legitimate and so are set apart days, or 'holy' days.Not as far as I can tell.
Anyway, you’ve sort of lost me. You offered a critique of the RPW, I pointed out that that wasn’t a fair critique, and now you say that “that is the RPW that is usually argued here.”
Some reject Christmas because they reject the authority of churches or magistrates to honour days or topics on particular days.No, you can reject Christmas for all kinds of reasons and that's cool with me. If you want to call it unwise, that's fine by me.
It's just that most here reject Christmas because they reject the authority of churches or magistrates or societies to honor days or topics on particular days. They are against all such 'holy days' or the pretension of such. Holiness in this sense is simply being set apart as a thing for a particular reason, and the magistrate and elders have plenty of authority to declare or honor such things in special cases. The RPW here is weaponized here to neuter them of that power.
You keep saying the “RPW here.” I don’t know if you mean that in a derogatory way. While currently it might be a minority position, the RPW as ”argued by many here” was historically standard within confessional reformed churches.I agree, but that is the RPW that is usually argued here.
I don't understand your confusion.Some reject Christmas because they reject the authority of churches or magistrates to honour days or topics on particular days.
Where are you getting this from? Where was this argued? I am trying to get a clear view of the argument before I respond.
The title of the thread is simply “Regulative Principle and Christmas.”The title of the thread speaks to this.
Are you saying this is your own view?The church calendar is legitimate and so are set apart days, or 'holy' days.
So the magistrate, according to you, has authority to declare or constitute special days. On what foundation do you claim this?Elders or magistrates may be wise or unwise in declaring individual ones or administering them, but they have plenty of authority. And that's the question here.
Jeremy, to be fair, I do not believe that is what the RPW means for all here. Further this seems to conflate element and circumstance.The RPW here means you must provide chapter and verse for preaching near a stone, and if it's not there, then you may not preach near a stone.
Again, not true. Maybe for some, but not “everyone basically”.That is denied by everyone in the thread, basically.
Eh? It is? They do? When did this happen?The title of the thread speaks to this. The church calendar is legitimate and so are set apart days, or 'holy' days.
Elders or magistrates may be wise or unwise in declaring individual ones or administering them, but they have plenty of authority. And that's the question here.
I've listed two foundations already.The title of the thread is simply “Regulative Principle and Christmas.”
Are you saying this is your own view?
So the magistrate, according to you, has authority to declare or constitute special days. On what foundation do you claim this?
Just trying to clearly understand your argument before I say anything.I don't understand your confusion.
It's the title of the forum and first post of the thread by the creator. Most here question the "liberty to ordain for ourselves and for the church special days of worship not instituted by God"?
Where in Scripture and where in the Confession? (The WCF?)I contend that it is self-evident, appears numerous times in Scripture, and is plainly inferred from the confession for the elders and magistrate to have said authority.