More info on the current nominee for SBC President, Dr. Ronnie Floyd

Check out the Total Truth blog, entry 1 and entry 2, for more info on the nomination of Ronnie Floyd for SBC President. I would say the questions asked would be fair questions for any nominee. This is not singling our Dr. Floyd but as I know of no other nominee, a major fault with the process, this is simply getting what information there is out to the public. In this day and age of the blog more information can be gathered but the flaw is that it is not all accurate or unbiased. However as there seems to be no other means to let the members of the SBC know of who they will be voting for all one can do is pray, search out the info they can find and pray some more. It would be nice if there was another candidate already out there so that at least those attending the convention could have some idea of what will be before them. Unity around one nominee is not truly unity as it does not allow for discussion and an effort to find the right man for the position.

We should all pray for the direction of the SBC at this convention as it could be a very important one, if the issues are dealt with. If however the issues are avoided, for the sake of unity or some other such justification, then business (not the word that we should like to see in the Christian realm) will be as usual.


Just added:
I thought I best add a link to further comments from Tad at Total Truth as he shows good judgment in his reaction to the questions he posed not being answered. The fact people want answers and are looking at the ministry of a nominee for the next SBC President is so that we can truly see what to expect for the vision for the SBC in the up coming years.

Ronnie Floyd statement on his nomination for SBC President

Ronnie Floyd has posted a statement with regards to his nomination for President of the SBC.

Relating to the whole nomination process I have heard it said that regardless of who is nominated that a person should be nominated much earlier than about a month before the convention. How is anyone supposed to be able to look into who they would vote for. Another issue in the process seems to be how is one to know who is nominated unless they get on the internet. If the nominations were earlier then the SBC could send out profiles and allow people to pray and investigate who they should vote for. Most importantly they can pray consistently over this issue rather than show up that weekend and find out who is running and then have short obligatory prayer and then vote.

What is wrong with God's Word?

With I heard the announcement of Ronnie Floyd being nominated by Jonny Hunt for the position of President of the SBC it was interesting to read the blog byTom Ascol, Of Fire Engine Baptisteries and Blasphemy , that referred to a church that had a fire engine in the baptistery and was fired when a child was baptized, what about the adults. I remember reading about this and listening to a conversation between video (it is on the page that is linked here), thanks to Tim Challies for the link..

When will this stop, my guess is not too soon as the mantra, whatever it takes to get the message across…. , seems to really mean whatever and not for the good. Do we please God by saying His word is not enough to change man’s heart? If one is to speak out they are called irrelevant and such. I am not saying to go back to flannel-graphs as mentioned in the video but for the faithful exposition of the word of God, yes even for children, that is delivered in a vibrant and understandable manner. The call to rely on God’s word is not a call to be irrelevant or to take God’s word lightly but to instead see it as the source of change and not our ingenuity.

Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo on Hell, what's next?

Well at least Brian McLaren has said something we can put a finger on, yet he still does not back his assertions up with anything but conjecture from his own reasoning and he does still seem to leave himself enough wiggle room to claim he is not a heretic. There was a couple posts over at Christianity Today: Post 1, Post2 with regards to Tony Campolo and Brian Mclaren’s views on hell and trying to form a third view. McLaren actually admits to be closer to the idea of universalism than he does to those that believe in exclusivism. But once again McLaren seems to set up a dichotomy that instead of dealing with theological truth we just need to feed the hungry, care for the poor and so on. The problem is that we are to do both and not either/or. Simply because he sees the church doing a poor job dealing with social issues does not mean that the church is wrong on theological issues or should ignore them.

Tony Campolo in Part 1 shows that simply using scripture is not enough as scripture needs to be rightly divided. He uses two passages Ephesians 4:9-10 and 1 Peter 3:19 to conclude that there is a good chance that there is a second chance to go to heaven once one dies. He seems to ignore much of other scripture for passages that in his words “can be interpreted” to back up his assertion.

It is interesting that those that have aligned themselves with the so called Emerging Church side of things so often do exactly what they claim they are against. I hear that the church has become to consumer and individual oriented, and I agree with this, but their answers seem to simply cater to a different consumer a, I guess, more compassionate consumer. So in doing this they simply create theology that includes all so all can be included in what they see God calls them to do. This in the end leads to a lot of busy and compassionate people heading towards hell, a hell that does exist regardless of the machinations these two men try.

By the way it is not only men like McLaren and Campolo that desire to deal with hell in a less than biblical manner. I remember reading a quote by John Stott, I wish I could remember where so this is just from memory so check it out yourself, on hell. In the quote he admits to his view of annihilationism as not being founded so much on scriptures teaching on hell but on his views of God. I hear he may have restated this in some manner but now simply says he is not sure (If any one has a link to where this was done it would be great to have that).

Bottom line is that the doctrine of hell is discomforting to the world and it is meant to be that way. If we water it down or deny it we are not telling the truth to people and more importantly we are denying what God’s word actually says.

New Website: Strange Baptist Fire

Well the new Strange Baptist Fire site is up and it will be a good place to go to see responses written with regard to the articles on the Baptist Fire site. I had not really read the articles on the Baptist Fire site until I followed a link there but when I did I simply saw the same incorrect teaching (if you can call it that) on the Doctrines of Grace that I have seen elsewhere else but their page just condenses the misinformation. It always amazes me that people can write what they write and not be held accountable for it, well until now.

Together for the Gospel Conference

Tim Challies is bloging from the Together for the Gospel Conference in Louisville Kentuky. The conferences has some great pastors and speakers; Mark Dever , Ligon Duncan, John MacArthur, C.J. Mahaney , Dr. Al Mohler, John Piper and R.C. Sproul. I have looked at a few entries and I will for sure have my order in for MP3s, from here, when they come out.

Creativity in Preaching and Ministry

I was in a conversation on creativity in ministry and it brought up an area I struggle with, while we do need to make sure we are communicating God's word I am not sure the word creative is applicable to this endeavor. All too often the church tries to be cute in delivering a message that stands on its own and leads to sermon series titles like “Desperate Households” and other such plays on popular culture. Why do we feel we need to mirror the culture to deliver God’s word as it seems to me in many ways the message of Christ was counter cultural. We spend way too much time trying to be “creative” and far too little time digging into God’s word. I would much rather be a man who communicates truth and is short on creativity than be a really creative person that communicates pabulum. Now we might want to say we want to be both creative and truthful however I think that when we become too creative we may hold an audiences attention but in the end all they remember is the creativity and they totally miss God. This is not an excuse to be lazy in how we deliver truth as we need to show the passion for the truth that we have for God so if we show no passion we convey a small view of God. So as to quit rambling I think we need to seek after passion much more than creativity.

There was a good article at Banner of Truth that echoes a lot of what I feel called: Variety And Creativity In Preaching?

I realize this is not popular and I am probably in the minority. But this is not a call for the “good old days”, what ever they are, but this is a call to relying on God and scripture rather than our so called creativity and human smarts.

The New Discerning Reader

There is a new Discerning Reader site, not connected to the old. Tim Challies bought the name when the old Discerning Reader closed down for a variety of reasons.

Any way, check it out as there are a lot of good reviews on books to read, who would have guessed, as well as reviews of DVDs. There will even be, in the future, mini-reviews that can be used in bulletins.

Biblical Theology

For those of you interested in Biblical Theology, and who isn’t, there are two sites I have come across that you can go to:

1) Biblical Theology – A blog/Forum to discuss issues relating to Biblical Theology
2) Biblical Theology Briefings and their related Blog Site

I would encourage you to check out these sites as the area of Biblical Theology seems to often get overlooked and in my opinion is instrumental in keeping ones focus on what all of scripture points to when delving into such areas as Systematic Theology. It is not a replacement for Systematic but is to go alongside it.

Here is an article explaining Biblical Theology:

- What is the Discipline of Biblical Theology? By Graeme Goldsworthy

Two Good Articles

Here are two good articles that I have come across recently:

First is one in Modern Reformation called: Without Excuse by Michael Horton
This deals with people’s struggles with the what it takes to be saved and how to answer ones co-worker that is asking questions.

How do we deal with objections to the claim that Jesus is the only way?
How much does one have to know to be saved?


This second article is in Christianity Today : Nothing But The Blood by Mark Dever
This article looks at the atonement and answers many of the objections, not simply by an unbelieving world, but by the church as well. This is a subject that is under attack from those seeking to reinterpret Paul to those just plain offended by the concept and wanting to create an alternative answer to the plain reading of scripture which is all too often reinterpreted by outside writings and cultural shifts.

Why the big deal about the Gospel of Judas?

Well, because the press wants it to be a big deal.

It would appear that with most things related to the press the goal of generating stories trumps truth. It is amazing that no matter the proofs we have regarding the revealed word of God if one find turns up that says something contradictory to God’s word it is often blindly accepted. However, when something shows up that may confirm some aspect of Christianity it is met with lots of skepticism, such as the find of the inscription that shows Christian churches existing earlier than many skeptics want to believe. Whether this find turns out to be dated correctly or not is not the issue it is that if a find appears to contradict the claims of Christianity it is widely publicized. But, when a find appears to support the claims for Christianity it is discredited or simply downplayed and often ignored

Below is an article from the Kairos Journal article on the Gospel of Judas.

Truly Ridiculous: National Geographic’s Forged “Gospel of Judas”

Late last week, the National Geographic Society heralded the release of a 4th century document discovered in Egypt and written in Coptic as a major insight into historical Christianity. Dubbed “The Gospel of Judas,” those marketing the manuscript have claimed that it gives new insights into “the disciple who betrayed Jesus.” The text provocatively suggests a “conversation” between Jesus and Judas in which the now infamous disciple learned a “secret mystery”: Jesus must abandon his physical body to accomplish his true spiritual mission. “You will exceed all of them,” Jesus supposedly tells Judas. “For you will sacrifice the man who clothes me.” In other words, this newly discovered “gospel” is nothing more than one of many propaganda pieces produced by Gnostics—a group of people who were desperate to undermine the doctrine of the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
Despite this background about the spurious provenance of this recent discovery, the mass media have been in frenzy about the phenomenon. After all, it’s good for business during the week leading up to Easter to take a cheap shot at historic Christianity. But the claims being made for the “Gospel of Judas” are nothing short of ridiculous. The New York Times ran an op-ed saying that historians had uncovered “proof that Judas might have been part of a divine plan.” In reality, as New Testament scholar Bruce Chilton observed in The New York Sun, “no scholar associated with the find argues this is a first century document or that it derives from Judas.” It is not in any way, shape, or form a historical writing that tells us anything reliable about either the real Jesus or Judas. Even those who say that this is the same text that the Church father Irenaeus condemned as heresy are hard pressed to prove that the Coptic version of “Judas” is the same one that the 2nd century bishop described (e.g., Irenaeus mentions a “Gospel of Judas” that has mythological material not included in the recently touted Coptic/National Geographic version).
“The Gospel of Judas” is little more than a forged pseudo-gospel probably written by some 4th century heretics. Elaine Pagels, a Princeton University religion professor and paid consultant for the National Geographic Project, is quick to point out that these people didn’t consider themselves heretics. But then again, when do heretics admit that what they believe is, in fact, heresy? Whether one is talking about the 4th century or the 21st century, there has been no shortage of desperate and unscrupulous people trying to discredit the “faith once for all delivered to the saints.”

Monday Travels Around the Blogosphere

Tom Ascol at the Founders blog is looking at submitting a resolution at this years SBC meeting regarding a resolution on church discipline and integrity in reporting statistics.

Here are updates on Lakeshore Baptist Church in Lakeshore Mississippi.

At Together for the Gospel C.J. Mahaney writes on: The Gospel.

Here is a review of Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God which is a great book on showing how evangelism and the sovereignty of God or intimately connected.

This is probably not the usual sermon you would hear on an Easter morning in the society which we live in as it may offend someone: Spiritual Resurrection by C. H. Spurgeon. Here are some comments on the seron at Pyromaniacs.

Speaking of being offensive, at Old Truth.com there is an article entitled: The Gospel Offends Because it is Intolerant of Sin.

A pastor kissing goats? Is this telling or what? Kissing goats, where are the sheep?

Immigration

Tom Ascol’s post for today: Immigration fiasco is very good as it shows that the immigration issue is not as simple as “just give everyone amnesty” or “ship them all home.” As Chrsitians we are called to follow the laws of the land but we are also called to weigh those laws against the laws of God. So when the issue of immigration comes up it is not as easy to deal with when it becomes real as Tom shows.

My persoanl gut reaction is to do everything the leagal way but Tom’s examples are very good in that they show that not only do laws need to be enforced but those laws need to make sense and be sensible. We are a country of immigrants and that is a good thing since it brings the world to us. As Chrsitians we are called pilgrims or sojourners so in many ways we are in this world in a way the world does not like. Could we be seen as wrongly here by the world, it would seem so if one simply reads the paper.

At the heart of this matter is to always remember to what kingdom we owe first alligience, God’s Kingdom. We can be loyal to our country, as I am, but this loyalty must not obscure our loyalty to the cross. A good example was when I was at a “weekender” at Captial Hill Baptist and Mark Dever talked about how he took the American flag from the front of the church, and some ensuing issues that were raised by well meaning members. Not because he was un-patriotic but he saw it as possibly giving the impression that being a Christian equated to being an American. With his church being in D.C many people from other countries visit there and the last thing that needed to be done was muddy up the message of the Gospel with some form of percieved Patirotic Religion.

This all said I am still struggling over what should be done with immigrationa and how to deal with where we are right now. How does one deal with the issues Tom raises? Much more prayer needs to go into this than is often done. I for one need to do this and put my feelings on hold while I consult God and Scripture.

A God Centered Gospel VS. A Man Centered Gospel

This article by Steven J. Cole: How John Calvin Led me to Repent of Christian Psychology is quite good in that it shows the problems inherent in a man centered Gospel when placed against Scripture. While the article deals with his personal move from a “Christian ”psychological approach to preaching and to a God centered it is all too true of much of today’s man centered gospel message. The goal of reading scripture becomes what does God say about me and what will He do for me rather than what does Scripture say about God and what I am supposed to do to glorify Him.

I can relate to his journey as I have in the 18 years I have been a Christian heard this theological approach way too often. Who has not heard the misuse of “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt 22:39) to validate that we need to have self love before we can love others. Thus the individual becomes the center of his own universe and how he feels about himself dictates how he reacts to others and even God. This is as opposed to doing as God commands us and realizing we are to find joy regardless of the circumstances that surround what we do. This kind of self-love thinking is far from the “…..take up his cross daily…” (Luke 9:23) attitude we are called to have by God and instead fits more in line with Oprah and Dr. Phil.

I pray the church and the individuals that make the church would see the fallacy of self love and rely on God rather than self.

Law and Grace

I was led to a good (are there any other kind) sermon by Charles Spurgeon to do with Law and Grace.

I think this quote from the sermon does a good job of explaining the law for the Christian:

" What is God's law now? It is not above a Christian-it is under a Christian. Some men hold God's law like a rod, in terrorem, over Christians, and say, "If you sin you will be punished with it." It is not so. The law is under a Christian; it is for him to walk on, to be his guide, his rule, his pattern. "We are not under the law, but under grace." Law is the road which guides us, not the rod which drives us, nor the spirit which actuates us. The law is good and excellent, if it keeps its place.”

This sermon helps me better articulate how the Law and Gospel work together. Not to mingle them but see their correct place, not by minimizing either but seeing God’s plan under the New Covenant for each.

When seen in light of the New Covenant (Jer 31:31ff) we see that the law is not abrogated (antinomianism) but is followed out of love and devotion for God not out of working for acceptance. His law is not burdensome (1 Jn 5:1-5) because we are not the ones that have to find the strength to follow it.

I was reading an article by Tom Ascol (A Neglected Topic for Needy Times )on this subject and came across this prayer from John Calvin:

Grant, Almighty God,

that as thou hast made known to us thy Law,

and hast also added thy Gospel,

in which thou callest us to thy service,

and also invitest us with all kindness to partake of thy grace,--

O grant, that we may not be deaf,

either to thy command or to the promises of thy mercy,

but render ourselves in both instances submissive to thee,

and so learn to devote all our faculties to thee,

that we may in truth avow that a rule of a holy and religious life

has been delivered to us in thy law,

and that we may also firmly adhere to thy promises,

lest through any of the allurements of the world,

or through the flatteries and crafts of Satan,

thou shouldest suffer our minds to be drawn away from that love

which thou hast once manifested to us in thine only-begotten Son,

and in which thou daily confirmest us

by the teaching of the Gospel,

until we at length shall come to the full enjoymentof

this love in that celestial inheritance,

which has been purchased for us by the blood of thy only Son.

Amen.

The fact we are under grace does not remove the law but lets us relate to it in a better and grace related manner.

Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort Interview on ABC Nightline

I just watched a tape of Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort (Way of the Master) that was recently done on ABC Nightline. It was a good interview and it was quite obvious that the interviewer just did not understand why Kirk does what he does. The interviewer saw much of what Kirk and Ray did as inciting rather than inviting but Kirk answered well that his job is not to avoid polarization; the Gospel does that, but to deliver the message of the Gospel truthfully.

You can read a transcript here and even see the video at this link: Kirk Cameron, From Sitcom Star to Evangelist.

Sin and Sacrifice (Hebrews 9:15-28)

I was reading Hebrews 9:15-28 and as I read about the sprinkling of blood in the OT sacrificial system and how it symbolizes the need for a perfect sacrifice, I was reminded of how this offends so many non-believers. Often this is hard for believers to defend or have an answer for as even for us it is a little grotesque.

The answer is we are not to defend it since it is meant to be grotesque. If we truly comprehended the amount of blood that would stream out of the temple and the ensuing stench during sacrifices, as the readers of Hebrews would recall, we are meant to see it, the sacrifices, as vile and uncomfortable. The reason is to remind us of our sin and the vileness of it. The death of Christ for that sin is to be remembered that way as well. All too often we see grace as the “Get Out of Jail Card” and in doing so neglect to see the darkness of our sin. The same sin Christ had to die for.

It is healthy to see our sin for what it is as this is what God uses to remind us of what we are not to be and to remind us of the changed hearts of the New Covenant that Christ ushered in at his death, burial, resurrection and ascension. We do need to glory in the grace of God but in doing so not neglect to see sin for what it is. Read Hebrews 9 and reflect on what the original sacrifices were to symbolize and how Christ fulfilling those symbols does not negate the vileness of the sin. Sin under the Old Covenant is no different than under the New as they are both to be cleansed by the death and shed blood of Christ, however, the cleansing of the Old Covenant sacrificial system was only a symbol of what was to come. That is why Hebrews lets us see that the sacrifices had to keep being offered until the perfect sacrifice, Christ Jesus, came. His sacrifice was a one time sacrifice and is not to be recreated over and over again or we miss the point of the perfect sacrifice.

So, when someone is offended by the whole issue of sacrifice for sin and the whole issue of blood help them see that this should remind us of what sin really is. I do not say they will buy the answer but if God is working on their heart they will come to see what their sin really is and repent.

Around the Blogosphere

News from around the Blogosphere:

Soulforce is to make a bus tour, I mean Equality Ride, of those colleges and universities that disagree with their views and have what they feel is anti-gay bias.. It would seem that we should be praying for those campuses that are going to as they stand for truth and that they will be firm yet loving in their conversations. Overall this tour is to gain publicity and to try and make out that those schools that stand for what scripture says are intolerant and harmful to society. The goal of the universities should be to do what is necessary to allow as little press as possible and still stand their ground and in the process show the visiting students that scripture denies what they are trying to promote.


Here is a report how things faired at Liberty University.


More and more the church tries to emulate the world in how it draws its consumers, and there is there is the rub, “consumers.” On Slice of Laodicea there is an article that deals with a church that has what would be considered a suggestive billboard that is supposed to draw people to a website and then to church. But in all of this is missed the Gospel and instead the focus in marketing. Is the Bible to be a source of info on our sex lives or to reveal the redemptive plan of God through His son Jesus Christ? There may be info in the scriptures that will help our relationships but all of this is secondary to the life changing effect of the Gospel. At the heart of this is, in my opinion, who one relies on to build the church: us or GOD.


Tom Ascol gives a heads up on what is to be taught at Centrifuge this year and shows that we need to be wary of the content that comes from the SBC as well as other places. I know after reading some different books about children and youth in the 1600’s ( A Token for Children ) and 1700’s ( To the Rising Generation ) it becomes apparent that we are much worse than shallow today we are not even in the water.

Women, Ministry and the Church

Having gone to the Shepherd’s conference Saturday and listened to Ligon Duncan speak on the issue of women in ministry and the importance of dealing with the subject, it reminded me of how the church today wants to do things the easy way. If you take a stand that women have roles to fill, just as men do, you will often be labeled as subjugating women. The issue is all too often laden with emotion and the simple fact that one might say that some ministry is not permissible is not acceptable in today’s culture. The church has bought into the world’s idea that if it is something you desire you should be able to “do it.”

What is amazing is that when it is said that there are limits to women’s ministry people forget that the same is to be said for men. Not all men can be elders no matter how good they teach or how successful they are in business. However, the church has missed the boat in that arena as well. At the heart of this all is that the heart of mankind desires to do whatever it pleases and if they are told no that just does not sit well. The whole issue of entitlement permeates the church and everyone feels they are entitled to do as they please.

We miss the point of observing the Trinity in that the 3 are one in essence, all God, but all have a role to fulfill. We do not see Jesus telling the Father, “no I would rather have your position because that is what I feel called to and who are you to say no since I am God.” Each member did as they were called to in the relationship: The Father sent the Son and the Son sent the Holy Spirit. So it is with us, we all have a part in the church and God has designed those parts not us. Once we start messing with the church to make it in our own image what a mess it becomes.

As a side note, this is not just an issue of women in ministry it is also about interpreting scripture. I think it is not a coincidence that those denominations that now ordain women now either condone homosexuality or are having to deal with the issue on a very serious basis. Once you start making everything in scripture culturally relevant there is really no end to what will happen as culture continually changes.

I do not say any of this is easy but if we truly see God’s word as it is, I can say it is not a burden. Nike’s saying does have merit in that when it comes to scripture we do need to “Just Do It.” Not without study and prayer but when the plain truth of scripture stares us in the face we need to comply and thankfully we are given that ability as believers due to the hearts we have being changed by God to allow us to comply and desire to do so.

Family Friendly II

More thoughts on what is actually being "Family Friendly:

As I further think about how the church is to rightly deal with families it does seem that the essential question to ask first is: What is the purpose of the church? If the purpose is to provide a slew of activities and allow parents a time of “spiritual renewal” then sending the children off in every direction would be a logical result. Now, I referenced “spiritual renewal” but I do not think that this has to be done apart from the family. We, the church, have in our day of the “individual” redefined things in such a way that if anything appears to get in the way of ones personal aim then it needs to be either eliminated or at least abated for some time frame. Thus having children in a service or at some specific age in a general Sunday morning study is seen as distracting and thus to be eliminated. Of course things are not worded this way and the common claim is that since differing ages learn differently then they need to be divided. While there is some truth to this it does not necessarily have to end in separation.

This is not an issue that only applies to children. I hear adults complain that group studies just slow down their spiritual walk. This individualistic approach neglects to see that the community grows together as well as individually. So while a group may slow one individual down that individual may actually increase the growth of the slower members of the community. Thus the church as whole grows much faster and more deeply and the individual grows in that they actually use the gifts they have for the benefit of others ( 1 Cor 12 ). This applies to children as well as adults so that if these differing groups learn together the growth will be so much more as a whole.

I do believe that there are times for groups to be built around specific needs, common life experiences and mutual goals not at the expense of the church as a whole. By constantly separating the church we in essence create many smaller churches that lack the discernment that others may provide but due to this separating is not possible.

I am sure that for many this sounds like an old fashioned, one school room, way of seeing church but let me assure you I do not think this is so. My goal in trying to see how this is too truly work is to see how God has designed the family and thus the church family and then make sure that we are doing all we can to help it grow. I do not think that on the sermon on the mount there was a separate children’s mini sermon on the mount or youth sermon on the mount with culturally correct lingo but those that were there sat and listened together. The parents were then tasked with explaining what was heard and this is how I think the main teaching in church should function. This way the teaching of children and youth is not abrogated and given to some other person but the parents are intimately involved in the discipleship of their children.

What is actually just as hard a problem is not in seeing how the church should function with regards to families but seeing how the church is to move to what is truly a “Family Friendly” church. This separation has gone on so long and become so ingrained moving people from this is a difficult task. This is true also for the teaching of younger people in the church. We so often dumb down the message to children that over time this is what is expected and all that can be handled but children can learn so much more.

I will have to think through this more as the more I ponder what God desires from His church all too often I see the church taking it’s cues from the world rather than scripture. Yes we have to deal with a fallen world but we as a church do not need to take on fallen principles but instead need to work at moving God’s people to God’s design.