Brilliant. It makes me ponder hard and deep. Is there ever a circumstance when we should punch back? When, then, is it right to fight? Or is it just the fight with gentle words and the power of the Gospel the only fight we are called to?
What do we do with Knox, Zwingli, the revolutionary Presbiterians in black robes? What of the many brethrens in my native country facing jail for defying tyranny with words and actions -- civil disobedience in many concrete forms?
Excellent questions. I am not a pacifist, and affirm the legitimacy of self-defense, civil disobedience, and asserting and defending one's rights under the law. Our *words* must not always be gentle; our *manner* ought to be. That is a very hard thing to do, to boldly speak the truth without sprinkling insults and ad hominems into our rhetoric. Far too many think "boldness" means "ruthless." And, finally, whatever the nature of our "punching back," it must be with integrity; usually, in the political realm, people mean "they don't follow the rules, so we shouldn't either." That's a no-go. Thanks for reading and your thoughtful question!
Truly Jesus our Lord Himself used words of insult and ad hominems many many times of various people he spoke to and surely his "manner" matched his rhetoric. Am I incorrect?
This article seems to be a little bit one sided in my humble opinion. Critiquing the serrated edge posture and rhetoric without considering the various examples our Lord Himself has said and done with a serrated edge. Let alone the apostle Paul, John the Baptist and James examples of non gentle and kind rhetoric. Example: almost all of Jesus encounters with the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, lawyers and the money changers in the temple (twice). John the Baptist with the Pharisees and the king. The apostle Paul telling Judaizers to castrate themselves who want to be justified by works of the law. And many times in 1st Corinthians where he seems to be talking quite harshly and using much satire of them. James calling his readers adulteresses. Not to even mention Nehemiah and all the prophets who clearly used the serrated edge. We need Nehemiahs more than ever today! Strong men walking uprightly with a sword in one hand and a trowel in the other. Willing to pull out some beards and smack some folks around waking them up!
Thanks for reading, Micah. I didn't "consider them" because I take them for granted. The task now is for you to tease out and explain how all of these examples you've listed, if they are to be viewed as models for us to follow, fit with the *imperatives* (not suggestions) I've highlighted in my essay. That's a task the author of the Serrated Edge was unable to do, so it would still be worthwhile. ;) C.f., https://frame-poythress.org/review-of-douglas-wilsons-a-serrated-edge/
Okay, I read half of John's article critiquing The Serrated Edge by Doug. That's really long and I just don't have the time to finish at the moment. So, what my point is here in saying that you only present one side of the story, John makes the same argument of Doug. The sin of omission. You only present a one sided view here in this article. Basically doing exactly what John accused Doug doing in his book
Yeah, that's not at all what's going on here. ;) And you might want to read the "bylines" on articles. I'm honored that you think I wrote something John Frame wrote, but ... I can only wish!
I suppose this is my point: the article is one sided in that it doesn't take into account the other side of the coin. The imperatives you address do not negate the fact we are in a war and there are weapons for the war. The idea that simply us suffering under persecution for the sake of Christ results in the overthrow of Rome in my opinion is silly. You may say "history tells us so". But none can assume that the serrated edge wasn't used to conquer Rome for Christ.
Also this, (there's 2 sides to this coin)
There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven—
A time to give birth and a time to die;
A time to plant and a time to uproot what is planted.
A time to kill and a time to heal;
A time to tear down and a time to build up.
A time to weep and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn and a time to dance.
A time to throw stones and a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing.
A time to search and a time to give up as lost;
A time to keep and a time to throw away.
A time to tear apart and a time to sew together;
A time to be silent and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate;
A time for war and a time for peace.
— Ecclesiastes 3:1-8
Also this:
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and we are ready to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete.
You make a good point, there are many times the “driving the money changers out with whips” approach is used. The way we can reconcile this with “love your enemies”, is we are not just dealing with individuals, if an evil leader is leading an entire group of people to hell, we have to consider not just how to love him, but how to love all the people being lead astray, this should involve some strong rebukes. On the other hand, if someone is following this evil leader out of ignorance a more gentle approach is warranted. This is wisdom, knowing the right thing to do in a given situation and given time.
Very challenging. I’m interested in Cesar’s comment below. I’m being influenced by the crowd in Moscow Idaho and hear them pushing for a bit more of the Knox type of fight. I’m sure there is middle ground. I also understand the theology but not sure how to practice yet. I’m a recovering dispensational 😉.
Also, to speak to your context more directly, I'll just say that whatever the merits of the "serrated edge" (maybe there are some), I've rarely, if ever, seen it practiced as anything other than a license to be a jackass. Nobody except a tribe of sycophants is impressed by smug smash mouth braggadocio, least of all the intended targets. So add this: it doesn't even *work.* ;)
Brilliant. It makes me ponder hard and deep. Is there ever a circumstance when we should punch back? When, then, is it right to fight? Or is it just the fight with gentle words and the power of the Gospel the only fight we are called to?
What do we do with Knox, Zwingli, the revolutionary Presbiterians in black robes? What of the many brethrens in my native country facing jail for defying tyranny with words and actions -- civil disobedience in many concrete forms?
Excellent questions. I am not a pacifist, and affirm the legitimacy of self-defense, civil disobedience, and asserting and defending one's rights under the law. Our *words* must not always be gentle; our *manner* ought to be. That is a very hard thing to do, to boldly speak the truth without sprinkling insults and ad hominems into our rhetoric. Far too many think "boldness" means "ruthless." And, finally, whatever the nature of our "punching back," it must be with integrity; usually, in the political realm, people mean "they don't follow the rules, so we shouldn't either." That's a no-go. Thanks for reading and your thoughtful question!
Truly Jesus our Lord Himself used words of insult and ad hominems many many times of various people he spoke to and surely his "manner" matched his rhetoric. Am I incorrect?
This article seems to be a little bit one sided in my humble opinion. Critiquing the serrated edge posture and rhetoric without considering the various examples our Lord Himself has said and done with a serrated edge. Let alone the apostle Paul, John the Baptist and James examples of non gentle and kind rhetoric. Example: almost all of Jesus encounters with the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, lawyers and the money changers in the temple (twice). John the Baptist with the Pharisees and the king. The apostle Paul telling Judaizers to castrate themselves who want to be justified by works of the law. And many times in 1st Corinthians where he seems to be talking quite harshly and using much satire of them. James calling his readers adulteresses. Not to even mention Nehemiah and all the prophets who clearly used the serrated edge. We need Nehemiahs more than ever today! Strong men walking uprightly with a sword in one hand and a trowel in the other. Willing to pull out some beards and smack some folks around waking them up!
Very one sided article indeed
Thanks for reading, Micah. I didn't "consider them" because I take them for granted. The task now is for you to tease out and explain how all of these examples you've listed, if they are to be viewed as models for us to follow, fit with the *imperatives* (not suggestions) I've highlighted in my essay. That's a task the author of the Serrated Edge was unable to do, so it would still be worthwhile. ;) C.f., https://frame-poythress.org/review-of-douglas-wilsons-a-serrated-edge/
Okay, I read half of John's article critiquing The Serrated Edge by Doug. That's really long and I just don't have the time to finish at the moment. So, what my point is here in saying that you only present one side of the story, John makes the same argument of Doug. The sin of omission. You only present a one sided view here in this article. Basically doing exactly what John accused Doug doing in his book
Grace and peace to you brother Brian
Yeah, that's not at all what's going on here. ;) And you might want to read the "bylines" on articles. I'm honored that you think I wrote something John Frame wrote, but ... I can only wish!
Yeah, I edited my mistake there
I suppose this is my point: the article is one sided in that it doesn't take into account the other side of the coin. The imperatives you address do not negate the fact we are in a war and there are weapons for the war. The idea that simply us suffering under persecution for the sake of Christ results in the overthrow of Rome in my opinion is silly. You may say "history tells us so". But none can assume that the serrated edge wasn't used to conquer Rome for Christ.
Also this, (there's 2 sides to this coin)
There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven—
A time to give birth and a time to die;
A time to plant and a time to uproot what is planted.
A time to kill and a time to heal;
A time to tear down and a time to build up.
A time to weep and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn and a time to dance.
A time to throw stones and a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing.
A time to search and a time to give up as lost;
A time to keep and a time to throw away.
A time to tear apart and a time to sew together;
A time to be silent and a time to speak.
A time to love and a time to hate;
A time for war and a time for peace.
— Ecclesiastes 3:1-8
Also this:
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and we are ready to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete.
— 2 Corinthians 10:3-6
You make a good point, there are many times the “driving the money changers out with whips” approach is used. The way we can reconcile this with “love your enemies”, is we are not just dealing with individuals, if an evil leader is leading an entire group of people to hell, we have to consider not just how to love him, but how to love all the people being lead astray, this should involve some strong rebukes. On the other hand, if someone is following this evil leader out of ignorance a more gentle approach is warranted. This is wisdom, knowing the right thing to do in a given situation and given time.
Very challenging. I’m interested in Cesar’s comment below. I’m being influenced by the crowd in Moscow Idaho and hear them pushing for a bit more of the Knox type of fight. I’m sure there is middle ground. I also understand the theology but not sure how to practice yet. I’m a recovering dispensational 😉.
Also, to speak to your context more directly, I'll just say that whatever the merits of the "serrated edge" (maybe there are some), I've rarely, if ever, seen it practiced as anything other than a license to be a jackass. Nobody except a tribe of sycophants is impressed by smug smash mouth braggadocio, least of all the intended targets. So add this: it doesn't even *work.* ;)
I published my reply to Cesar just seconds prior to your comment. ;)
Thank you. I’m going to subscribe. This is content that is very helpful to me as a Christ follower. Looking forward to reading your books.
Outstanding.
Excellent analysis below, Brian.