Here is something very important for children and parents, especially fathers. In the ten commandments (Exodus 20:12) the fifth commandment says, "Honor your father and mother." Don't treat them or talk about them in a way that makes them look foolish. Don't talk back to them as though they were just another kid.BTW - he also has an extended parenthetical comment about singleness that I found to also be very enlightening. The link above will take you to the full manuscript.
Instead, the Bible says (Ephesians 6:1), "Children obey your parents." Do what they say. Don't lie to them. Next to God the instruction of your parents is the most sacred and important thing in your life. Treat them with great respect. The Bible promises that things will go far better for you if your do.
So on the one hand the Bible says that children are responsible to honor and obey their parents. If they don't there will be trouble, and if they do there will be reward. Children are addressed and children are responsible for their submissiveness and respect.
But on the other hand our text says that fathers are responsible for the behavior of their children. (1 Tim. 3:4) "He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way." If he succeeds he will be judged more fit for church leadership, and if he fails, he will be judged unfit for church leadership. The father's are addressed and the fathers are responsible for the children's submissiveness and respect.
How are we to put these two things together: that the children are responsible to obey, and that the fathers are responsible to have obedient children? I'm not sure what the answer is. I've tried to think it through, but I can't see it clearly yet.
So in respect to the Scripture I am simply going to let the two truths stand, and urge you to take them very seriously. Children are responsible before God to honor, and obey and respect and be submissive to their parents. And parents—especially fathers—are responsible to have honoring, obedient, respectful and submissive children.
Very practically what this means is that if one of my four sons were to ever rebel against me and become totally insubordinate and defiant and became delinquent or criminal, he would be responsible. He would have to reckon with the judgment of God, and with the inevitable consequences of conscience and social stigma and legal repercussions. He is accountable.
But that would not be the whole story. The text teaches that I am responsible for my son's submissiveness and respect. I am responsible that they be obedient. If one of them rebels against what I teach and becomes insubordinate and defiant and delinquent, I too would be held accountable. I would have to reckon with God's discipline and with the consequences for my own ministry, which could be interrupted or even ended.
So the impression I want to leave you with this morning—especially you fathers—is that being responsible parents is a serious business. Far more serious than most of us think. When we see ourselves as responsible for our children's submissiveness and respect as 1 Timothy 3:4-5 says we are, our response should be to go to some private corner of the house and fall on our knees before God and cry for the salvation of our children and for their protection from the Satan and their perseverance in faith and obedience to the end of their days.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Piper on Leadership and Parenting
The other morning as I was biking to church I listened to this message from John Piper called, "He Must Manage His Household Well". The excerpt below served to crush me in dependence as a pastor and a father.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I liked the post, but Piper left me asking: "obedient to what? to whatever I say as a parent? to what exactly are we and our children to be obedient? What does it mean to obey 'god's commands' in light of how Jesus teaches us in Matthew 5-7? What about Philippians 2? Is this a model for our obedience and Christian lifestyle?" I think (hope) he would clarify--I can think of many a pastor and professed Christian who follow this sort of take on Christian parenting, but lack a definite center and focus which defines that to which they are obedient. What is the model of obedience? And what does it look like today? These matters are too important to leave fuzzy and undefined.
slow down PhD boy...
It's just one sermon clip, not his whole theology of family or parenting. For a more broad stroke of his take check this out:
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TopicIndex/104/
Keep the comments coming Fev!
http://www.desiringgod.org/
ResourceLibrary/TopicIndex/104/
I think Justin Taylor's blog is amazing. How come you don't post as much stuff as he does? He does like 5 or more things a day.
Thanks for the 'slow down' message....but I still stand by this. Not everyone hears all of what Piper may have to say and the sermon, I feel, is incomplete if he just leaves it where he did (I read it). Whether just one sermon or not, those loose ends are too significant to let go untied.
Besides, my comments were for discussion, not a critique of Piper's sermon. I was raising questions that I had in result to what he said....so, I ask it again: exactly what is the form and paradigm for our obedience? The "love command" is still too fuzzy, as is the general statement "servant leadership" or whatever. What does our obedience look like?
All in good fun, my boy - form of our obedience? Honor thy father and mother... that might be a good place to start.
Still vague, I say....how is one to honor father and mother? What are the grounds and warrants for obedience? What about the example of Christ and the 'cruciform' life? For Jews, the OT command to honor father and mother was rooted in the fact that parents are like god in that they gave life to the children and like god in their position of authority over those of their house--thus parents were to imitate god in their lives and actions and children were to obey parents as parents obey god. For Christians, Jesus Christ as Lord puts a different spin on this. Jesus has given god's definitive image both of what god looks like and also how we are to imitate and obey god. So, just "honor parents" or whatever on its own is vague. I am just trying to push an issue....make whoever reads your blog (which seems to be only me right now) think more about what may be a 'given' to them.
Here is the thing Kyle, with every single sermon ever preached you can say, 'Yeah but they didn't talk about this." - No one can preach the whole of the Bible says on a certain subject or topic, thus benefit of the doubt must be given.
Why don't you just say what you think, instead of trying to draw it out. Sounds like you need to start your own blog, but if not I enjoy the conversation here...
In terms of obedience, I would say... to all that God has revealed (the Bible) to us as his will for us. Ultimately, "be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect" - thus leading to despair which takes us to the cross and dependence on the HS and God is glorifed though it for his glory and our joy.
That's my two second answer...
Zachary,
--"No one can preach the whole of the Bible says on a certain subject or topic, thus benefit of the doubt must be given."--of course, Zach. Give me the benefit here. In my first post, I gave Piper the benefit when I said, "I think (hope) he would clarify." My comments were to ask further questions about obedience. It is precisely because no one can preach on the whole Bible in one sermon that we (should) ask the "what about this or that aspect?" sorts of questions--to keep pushing for deeper clarity and understanding, isn't it?
--"Why don't you just say what you think, instead of trying to draw it out."--Because I wanted to see where people (in this case only you) went with the questions and suggestions. I wanted to see what other peoples' hermeneutic would be, rather than simply saying what I think so that other people can just respond to what I say rather than the questions I raise. And because it appears to frustrate you (wink, wink).
--"In terms of obedience, I would say... to all that God has revealed (the Bible) to us as his will for us. Ultimately, "be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect" - thus leading to despair which takes us to the cross and dependence on the HS and God is glorifed though it for his glory and our joy."--All fine and good, Zach---you sound like you read Piper.
A few comments:
1. Your statement seems to suppose the view that the cross is only for our salvation. "God's call is to be perfect, and we can't do that, so he sent Christ on the cross who did it for us...." This is right, but this is only half of the equation, I think. For some reason the bulk of modern Christianity emphasizes this side of the equation--probably a result of Luther's imputed righteousness/sweet swap theology.
2. The other side of the equation: The cross is not just our way out of god's judgment if we have faith, and the Spirit is not just that which helps us better keep god's commands. That often leads to an "I'm working on it" sort of attitude which it true (we are all working on it), but more times than not falls short of what the NT teaches us. I don't read in Matthew that Jesus' commands in the Sermon on the Mount are just high standards to drive us to the cross--they describe how the cross-transformed life is to be lived. That seemingly nit-picky saying about anger in Matthew 5:21-26 is expected to be kept (5:17-20; 7:21-27; 28:18-20). Why? Because the Spirit of Christ is in us, and if it is in us and we claim identification with the crucified Christ, we darn better be living according to his commands; he expects it of us--was he mistaken? The Spirit is more than just that which helps us--its very presence in our lives says "I belong to Christ" and makes what is humanly not possible, possible--if we have the Spirit, we can keep the commands; Paul wondered if the Corinthians really possessed the Spirit in light of their behavior. In addition, then, to being salvation from our sinfulness, the cross has also become the very paradigm for just/righteous living before god. You say about obedience-- "to all that God has revealed (the Bible) to us as his will for us. Ultimately, "be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect." Well, there are a number of ways that this can manifest itself, Zach. The New Testament's claim, as you know, is that Christ has fulfilled "the law and the prophets." Now, we all know he fulfills the prophets ("thus the word through the prophet was fulfilled..." is all over Matthew). However, what does it mean to say he fulfilled the Law? That he kept all the commands? Perhaps, but the language is that of "fulfillment," not "keeping/obeying" the Law. More likely it is that Christ IS the law (i.e. god's will for living). He is so through both teaching and his life. The "take my yoke upon you" saying in Matthew 11:29-30 was language used of Jews in the first century to refer to the Torah/god's wisdom--Jesus fills this position. This is why Jesus both alters and goes beyond the commands of the OT in the Sermon on the Mount, and why he holds authority to decide what can and can't be done on Sabbath; this is why Paul speaks of Christ as the 'wisdom of god' in 1 Corinthians (i.e. the revelation of the very mind of god; Paul's Jewish contemporaries spoke of the Torah as the wisdom of god!) and that Christ is the end of the Law and that the Law was only a pedagogue until Christ came. For Paul it is precisely Christ in his suffering and death--the crucified Christ--which is god's wisdom, and thus the Law according to which those who believe and have the Spirit should live.
4. My issue: there seems to be this fuzziness and lack of bite to Christian morality today that largely ignores that the "scandal of the cross" (as Paul puts it) is not only that god has paid the price of sin on our behalf; it is also that the will of god for our lives and the shape of right living before god is to be transformed and turned upside-down in identification with the cross. Too often we speak of "being perfect" as an unattainable goal, and so we leave it at that and go on our merry ways with no scandalous, upside-down change in our lives that shows that our manner of life has become regulated by identification with the crucified Lord. I am not saying that Christians do not take Jesus' commands seriously, nor am I suggesting salvation by works--I am not talking salvation here, I am talking life as a believer who will be saved (always a future event in Paul's letters). As a result of this lack of bite in Christian morality the divorce rate among Christians is on par with the rest of the world, we have people claiming Christ as their savior who beat on other people for sport (doesn't this conflict with turning the other cheek or loving one's neighbor? or are we only to apply 'turn the other cheek' when we are persecuted, so that when we are not we have free reign?), many churches operate with a corporate- business, triumphalist attitude...(Isn't there a fundamental tension with marketing Christ and/or one's particular church, yet claiming identification with the same Christ who fulfilled Isa 42 in Matthew 12: "he will not cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets..."). Are we vigorously attempting to bear the image of the crucified Christ and keep his commands? Sure, we bear the image of Christ by offering hope and forgiveness to the world, but it seems that "Christ crucified" is too often not our mark of living, whereas everything in the New Testament says it should be.
Anyway, just some of my thoughts. Perhaps I have said too much and embarrassed myself. I hope at least I have offered something to ponder (unless this is all old news to you and just a new thing to me).
Fev,
Love the post - I'm not getting testy, just being frank - drawback of blog world - no tone of voice or non-verbals.
I hear what you are saying in terms of your "beef". I just hope that you are not going down the road of some wack Nazerene theology concerning total sanctification in this life. We both know that 1 John kind of shoots that whole theology down. ie... Lutheran liturgical text: "If we say we have no sin we decieve ourselves, etc."
My shortness of answer is that I probably don't want to engage in term paper writing on my blog.
I'm glad to see you engaging here. Keep droppin your bombs!
Didn't think you were getting testy...I have just become a more combative person as of late when it pertains to these sorts of things--Laura always reminds me when I criticize sermons. Not too Christ-like, I know--one of the sins I'm working on.
No Nazarene theology here; however, it needs to be taken seriously that we are called to a far more radical standard of life--one that invites persecution, even--and I just ain't seeing it enough. The 1 John stuff is right, but I have to things in to say about it, though:
1)it can not become a sort of easy out for us (I know you understand this). There is a sense in which we are not yet perfect as we will be in the gloryland, but on the other hand we are people with the Spirit in us--Paul says in 1 Cor 6:11 that we "have been sanctified..."(not "we will be," or "we are in process..."). So there is a tension there, and one which needs to be seriously dealt with and exemplified in our lives.
2) What exactly is the sin spoken of in 1 John--more general sin (lying, stealing, slander, hate, etc.), or is it something more related to rightly confessing Jesus as Lord and as the only true revelation of god the Father? Or is it a bit of both?
We need more clear, non-compromising engagement with what we are called to as Christians, and less easy livin' Christianity I think, don't you?
Thanks, Z.
Amen
uhh...I watched Curious George with my kids this morning.
yeah me too.
Post a Comment