Vol. 8, No. 1 O R D A I N E D S E R V A N T · 2020. 12. 21. · Kingsley Elder, Paul MacDonald,...

The Committee on Christian Education

Published byThe Christian Education Committee

of

THE ORTHODOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH

January, 1999

Vol. 8, No. 1

O R D A I N E D S E R V A N T

ORDAINED SERVANT

Statement Of Purpose

Ordained Servant exists to provide solid materials for the equipping of office-bearers to serve more faithfully. The goal of this journalis to assist the ordained servants of the church to become more fruitful in their particular ministry so that they in turn will be more capableto prepare God's people for works of service. To attain this goal Ordained Servant will include articles (both old and new) of a theoreticaland practical nature with the emphasis tending toward practical articles wrestling with perennial and thorny problems encountered byoffice-bearers.

Editorial Policy

1. Ordained Servant publishes articles inculcating biblical presbyterianism in accord with the constitution of the Orthodox PresbyterianChurch and helpful articles from collateral Reformed traditions; however, views expressed by the writers do not necessarily representthe position of Ordained Servant or of the Church.

2. Ordained Servant occasionally publishes articles on issues on which differing positions are taken by officers in good standing in theOrthodox Presbyterian Church. Ordained Servant does not intend to take a partisan stand, but welcomes articles from various viewpointsin harmony with the constitution of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Published for the Christian Education Committee of the Orthodox Presbyterian Churchunder direction of

Dr. James Gidley, Mr. David Winslow, Rev. Larry Wilson and Rev. William Shishko

Contents: Vol. 8, No. 1

Editorial Notes............................................................................................................................... .................................1

Women in Office; Especially about Deaconesses, by Dr. Soon-Gil Hur..........................................................2

The Forgotten John Murray, by D. G. Hart and John R. Muether.........................................................................8

Evolution: The Materialistic Juggernaut - A Christian Challenge (Pt. 2) by Gregory E. Reynolds...............11

Pastor to Pastor: The Riches of Spurgeon (Pt. 3) , by William Shishko...........................................................16

Elder to Elder, ‘Home Visitation and Family Devotions’, by David Winslow.............................................19

About Children in the Worship Services of the Church, by David King.........................................................21

“

Ordained Servant — Vol. 8, No. 1

Ordained Servant (USSN pending) is published quarterly by Pleroma Press, PO Box 242,

5645 73rd St SW, Carson, ND 58529-0242. Copies to ordained officers of the Orthodox

Presbyterian Church are paid for by the Committee on Christian Education. Others remit $12

per year. Periodicals postage pending at Carson, ND. POSTMASTER send address

correction changes to Ordained Servant, PO Box 242, Carson, ND 58529-0242.

Please send all materials intended for possible publication in Ordained Servant to the Editor, G. I.Williamson, 406 Normal College Ave., Sheldon, IA 51201. (Or send it in a text file, by Email to:[email protected]). Please send all requests for additional copies, or back issues, to the Publisher,Stephen Sturlaugson, PLEROMA PRESS, Box 242, Carson N.D. 58529. Telephone: 701-622-3862 (Email:[email protected]), or download them from The Orthodox Presbyterian Church's Web site on theInternet at: http://www.opc.org.

Editorial Notes

Ordained Servant — Vol. 8, No. 1 1

This issue marks the beginning of the 8thyear of publication of Ordained Servant Itis our sincere hope that it has served thechurch well, and not only the Orthodox Presbyte-rian Church but also others from around theworld who have accessed our internet web site (athttp://www.opc.org). But Ordained Servant is onlya small part of what is now available. Throughthe diligent work of the Rev. Stephen Pribblethere is now available, at that site, some of thehistoric General Assembly papers which havemarked the life of the OPC, as well as the doctri-nal standards of the Church (with proof texts),and a selection of other resource materials. It isalso now possible to send e-mail to most of thepastors of the OPC (those who use computers) byuse of an address that is easy to remember. Mine,for example, is simply: [email protected] (and,for most of our pastors, you would only need tosubstitute their last name for mine to have itright. You would need to change the number, ofcourse, when it comes to a name like Miller orSmith because there are so many—but you getthe idea). It is our hope that through the OPC website Ordained Servant will do its part in reachingto the ends of the earth in promoting the cause ofChrist.

In this issue we present the second part of Dr.Soon-Gil Hur's paper on the subject of womendeacons. We do this despite the fact that we(the editor, as well as overseers of the editor) arenot convinced by Dr. Hur's paper. We do it,rather, because we believe it is very important forthe members of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church(OPC)—and especially pastors, ruling elders anddeacons of the OPC—to be well informed of theviews and practices of other churches that belongto the International Conference of ReformedChurches (ICRC) in which we now hold member-ship. It was at the 1997 ICRC convened in Seoul,Korea, that this paper was presented. Four rep-resentatives were there on behalf of the OPC, andthey were thus able to hear it. But it is our hope

that by publishing this paper—even though we donot agree with its conclusions—many other office-bearers of our church will be stimulated to thinkfurther on this subject as a result of Dr. Hur'spaper.

One of the good things that we've learnedfrom the use of e-mail is the advantage ofbrevity. Have we not all learned that wecan usually say all that we need to say much moresuccinctly than we used to say it before thismodern wonder came along? In deference to thispresent-day preference for getting to the point myoverseers have urged me to try to keep the lengthof the articles in Ordained Servant as short aspossible. So if you have something that you wantto say through the pages of Ordained Servantplease try to keep it down to four pages, or less(single spaced 12 point type).

The cover of this issue features a recentpicture of the Committee on ChristianEducation. The men shown are—from leftto right—David Winslow, John Muether, DougFelch, Doug Clawson, Larry Wilson, Alan Strange,Tom Tyson, G.I. Williamson, John Galbraith,Kingsley Elder, Paul MacDonald, Allen Curry,William Shishko, James Gidley and GeorgeMiladin (Larry Woiwode is also a member of theCommittee but was unable to attend the Octobermeeting and therefore missed out on the picture).

From time to time we still get requests forback issues of Ordained Servant and mostof those originally printed are now longsince gone. We would therefore again draw atten-tion to the fact that all of the back issues ofOrdained Servant are readily available for elec-tronic download at our http://www.opc.org website.

3. DEACONESS

We come now to the main question. If deaconsare not involved in authoritative teaching and au-thoritative disciplinary action, but only in serving,is it possible to have female deacons in congrega-tional life? Is there any evidence in the Scriptures orany trace in history? The Scriptures show us somepositive evidence that women were involved indiaconal work in the congregation. 1 Timothy 3:11,Romans 16:1, 1 Timothy 5:3-16, and Acts 6:1-6 arethe main places of evidence given in the Bible.

3.1 “Women” (γυναικες) in 1 Timothy 3:11

The group of women mentioned in 1 Timothy3:11 has become the centre of much controversy.Many of today’s exegetes come to the conclusionthat they were female servants (deaconesses). Itssignificance is derived from the fact that "the women"appear in the midst of describing the qualificationsnecessary for the office of deacon. Who are thesewomen?

The Greek word can mean wives. Its definitionis therefore dependent upon a consideration of thecontext. Exegetes bring forth various translationsand opinions: wives of overseers and deacons, wivesof deacons, female deacons, and a group similar tobut distinct from deacons (male).

They cannot be wives of both bishops and dea-cons.

6 It is more likely that they were the wives of

deacons. However, in this case the question arises: ifPaul intended to talk about the wives of deacons,why did he not add the possessive pronoun “their?”

?

Instead of using “their,” Paul refers to the women ina manner which makes them parallel to the bishopsand deacons, implying a new but similar class ofpersons.

8 He says, “The women likewise.” The

significance of these words becomes very clear whenit is set alongside the introduction of the bishops (vs.2) and of the deacons (vs. 8). Paul said, “A bishopmust be . . .” “Deacons likewise (must be),” “Thewoman likewise (must be).” The correlation be-tween the three seems to be very clear.

It ought also to be noted that both the sentenceintroducing the deacons and the one introducing thewomen do not have verbs of their own, but presumethe verb already used to describe the elders: δει,‘must be.’

9 The requirements for the deacons and the

women run parallel.

Thus the context, and the parallelism betweenthe three groups (overseers, deacons, and women),and the parallelism between the prerequisites forthe women and the deacons would have us con-clude that the women of 1 Timothy 3:11 cannot bewives of the deacons. They must be a group ofwomen who are similar to the deacons, or veryclosely related to the work of the deacons. It conse-quently may be said that they were deaconesses,even though it cannot be stated with absolute cer-tainty. We may at least conclude that they wereassistant-deacons.

10


Women in Office;

Especially About “Deaconesses”

Dr. Soon-Gil Hur

Part 2 of an Address presented at the 1977 ICRC in Korea

6 Calvin says this about this text, “He speaks of the wivesof both elders and deacons, because they have to assisttheir husbands in their office.” Commentary on 1 Timothy

7 Nicholas, D.R., What's a Woman to do in the Churches?,Good Life Productions Inc. 1979, p. 40.

8 Schreiner, T.R., “The Valuable Ministries of Women inthe Context of Male Leadership, A Survey of Old andNew Testament Examples and Teaching” in John Piperand Wayne Grudem (eds.), Recovering Biblical Manhood &Womanhood, Crossway Books, 1991, pp. 213,214. VanBruggen, pp. 112,113.

9 See the study of James B. Hurley, Man and Woman inBiblical Perspective, Zondervan, 1981, especially pp. 223-233.

10 Hendriksen, W., 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus, The Banner ofTruth Trust, 1972 reprinted, p. 133.

ESPECIALLY ABOUT “DEACONESSES”


3.2 Phoebe, ‘A servant of the church’ in Rom. 16:1

Is there any other place in the Scriptures that theidea of deaconess can be supported with? We oughtnot to base our understanding of the deaconess onjust one text alone. Scripture must always be read inthe light of parts of other Scripture. “When there isa question about the true and full sense of anyScripture (which is not manifold, but one) it must besearched and known by other places that speakmore clearly.”

11 “There is a unity of the Scriptures.”

There are some other places in the Scriptureswhich point in the direction of the institution ofdeaconess. One of them is Romans 16:1 in whichPhoebe is called “a servant (διακονος) of the Churchat Chencrea.” Regarding the word διακονος thereare dividing opinions between exegetes. Bible trans-lations therefore, differ from each other (AV: a ser-vant; RSV: a deaconess; NIV: a servant (deaconess infootnote), Korean Bible: a servant). ∆ιακονος cansimply mean “servant,” or “the one who serves,”“minister,” or even “deacon” as an office. The mean-ing must be determined according to the context.

If διακονος was never used as a title of office in theScriptures, διακονος here must be understood simplyas a servant or minister. But it was used as a title ofoffice (1 Timothy 3:8; Philippians 1:1). Had Phoebebeen a male, we would have immediately assumedthis reference to be a reference to the office of deacon.The fact that Phoebe is female has resulted in differingopinions. However, this word points into the direc-tion of office, because the women in 1 Timothy 3:11may be assumed to be deaconesses. She, whom manybelieve to have been the bearer of Paul’s letter, wasintroduced to the Church of Rome in terms of herrelationship to her Church, and further commendedon the basis of her past service to God’s people. Shemust have had a particular function in the church. Theword διακονος cannot as yet be a technical term todenote the office of deacon. It could be understoodsimply in terms of a regular pattern of service under-taken by her on behalf of her local church. It would bepremature to speak of an established office ofdiaconate. One, hereby, can propose that only later ondid the term διακονος function as indicator of anoffice, namely in 1 Timothy 3.

12 It seems certain,

however, that the word διακονος was already crys-tallizing as a title for an office. A question, then, maybe put: if it was already being used as an official title,why did Paul use the masculine διακονος, and not“deaconess?” In that time the feminine “deaconess”did not exist. So in the case of Phoebe, διακονος, themasculine form of ‘deacon,’ was used for both menand women.

13 Phoebe was in Rome in some sort of

official capacity, as διακονος of the Church inChencrea. It is clear that she was a female servant.

It is as yet impossible to say with absolute cer-tainty that the office of deaconess was introduced inthe early Church. But it can be said with certaintythat 1 Timothy 3:11 and Romans 16:1 clearly point ina positive direction. Further the fact that the womenwho were endowed with spiritual gifts were em-ployed for the upbuilding of the Church by the Lordalso makes us think in this direction. It is veryinteresting that Paul had a number of female fellow-workers. He, for example, refers to Priscilla, Euodia,and Syntyche (Romans 16:3; Philippians 4:2). Hisministry involved a significant number of women asfellow-workers.

What was then the role of the women in hisministry? It cannot be said in a single word. Onemust look for detailed information in the Scriptures.There is evidence that Priscilla, with her husband,taught Apollos in her house (Acts 18:24-28). But onecannot conclude from this that she was acting as anelder or teacher in a formal sense, because onecannot find any female ruling elder or female teach-ing elder in the New Testament, as this sort of office,which includes the exercising of authority over men,was prohibited for women (1 Timothy 2:11-14; 1Corinthians 14:33-35). One can, however, safely con-clude from the women among Paul’s fellow-work-ers that they were involved in the missionary enter-prise and for the upbuilding of the Church withendowed gifts. Thus one can safely say that Phoebewas a very active servant (deaconess) and helperwho faithfully served for the edification of Chencreanchurch life.

3.3 “Widows” in 1 Timothy 5:9 and in Acts 6:1

The possibility that deaconesses existed in theapostolic church is strengthened by the interpreta-tion of the widows mentioned in 1 Timothy 5:9 and

11 Westminster Confession, 1:9

12 Dunn, J.D.G. Romans 9-16 (Word Biblical Commentary,Vol. 38b), Word Books, 1988, p. 887. 13 Hurley, p. 231

WOMEN IN OFFICE


in Acts 6:1. Widows in both these places appear toindicate a deaconess.

3.3.1 “Widows” in 1 Timothy 5:9

With respect to the “widows” of 1 Timothy 5:9there are also dividing views. Some exegetes seethem as the widows in need.

14 But Calvin figures

they were deaconesses. He introduced two sorts ofdeacons according to his interpretation of Romans12:8 and 1 Timothy 5:9-10. He, in the first place,refers to the deacons who distribute the alms accord-ing to Romans 12:8: “He that gives, let him do it withsimplicity; . . . he that shows mercy, with cheerful-ness.” And the second kind of deacon refers to thosewho devoted themselves to the care of the poor andsick. He says,

“Of this sort were the widows whom Paul men-tions to Timothy (I Timothy 5:9-10). Women couldfill no other public office than to devote themselvesto the care of the poor. If we accept this (as it mustbe accepted), there would be two kinds of deacons:one to serve the church in administering the affairsof the poor; the other, in caring for the poor them-selves.”

It is noteworthy that Calvin understood thewidows who were deaconesses in the church to havehad a “public office.”

It seems to be very clear from the context that thewidows were some sort of female servant.

15 Paul

commands, “Honour widows who are real wid-ows” (vs. 3). If one reads this in the context of thewhole chapter, he will quickly see that “honour”does not refer to financial care for the widows. Verse18 makes reference to financial care for widows, butdoes not use the word “honour.” Paul further com-mands, “Let the elders who rule well be consideredworthy of double honour” (vs. 17). Verse 18 thengoes on to speak about the financial care for theelders, but it does not speak of “honour.” In theverses 9-15 Paul speaks about widows who are more

than sixty years of age and who can be enrolled insomething. This would certainly not be for financialsupport, because it would be very strange if onlywidows over the age of 60 and of good testimonywould receive financial support. Therefore it is clearthat in these verses Paul does not command honourfor widows by means of financial support. “Honour”means much more than financial support. Real wid-ows are worthy of honour, thus they can be enrolled.Real widows are not simply determined by the agesixty. They are distinguished from the widows whohave children and are supported by their brothersand sisters (vss. 3-5 16). These real widows are notconnected to financial matters, but to a special task,as the word “enroll” indicates. The Greek word“καλεγεσθαι” means “recruit,” “appoint,” and theverb points to the people who are called and set apartfor a special task. Thus in verse 9 we can think of it asthe appointment of a widow to a special task. Whatthis task consisted of is not clearly indicated. It maynot have been necessary for Paul to mention it,because the congregation in Ephesus already knewthe institution of serving widows. However, verse13 gives us some hints, namely, that the task in-cluded going around from house to house for theupbuilding of the church.

In concluding this consideration of the widowsin 1 Timothy 5 we may ask whether these widowsare the same as the women mentioned in 1 Timothy3:11 or perhaps similar to them. They could belong tothe same group, because 3:11 makes no reference tothe marital status of the women. Both the womenand the widows were clearly appointed to a perma-nent task. Why then two references in the sameletter? someone may ask. It is not strange that theapostle wrote about the same group twice, becausein 3:11 he deals with the qualification, while inchapter 5 he discusses them in connection with mu-tual relationships in the church. He deals with over-seers in chapter 3, but he also deals with them(elders) in chapter 5. Consequently it is possible thatthe elderly widows were appointed as women fordiaconal help. Whatever the case, one thing is veryclear: that some widows (women) were appointedfor the task of upbuilding congregational life.

3.3.2 “Widows” in Acts 6:1

The ministry of widows for the upbuilding ofcongregational life seems to have been a commonthing in the congregation of Jerusalem. Many ex-

14 J. Hurley says that the early churches cared for thewidows in Jerusalem and Joppa. According to him theGreek-speaking widows in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1) and thegrieving widows at the death of Dorcas were the widowsin need (Acts 9:39) (p. 121).

15 For an in depth study see Van Bruggen, pp. 119-140(“Weduwen in ere”).



egetes see the Greek widows as those who wereneglected in the receiving of financial care. But thereare also other exegetes who understand them as notbeing allowed to share in the distributing of care.From what we have so far seen about widows, thelatter seems to be a more correct interpretation. Thewhole point depends on how one understands “thedaily ministration” in Acts 6:1. There are differenttranslations: NIV and RSV: “the daily distribution;”Korean Bible: “the daily relief.” Does it mean thedaily caring for the poor?

It can be assumed that widows in general werepoor and needed financial care in that time. But itwas not always true. Dorcas in Joppa was a discipleof the Lord called Tabitha (Dorcas; Acts 9:36-45). Shewas always doing good and helping the poor. Shehad made many robes and clothing for the poor.When she died, many widows came to her place andwept, showing Paul the robes and clothing thatDorcas had made “while she was still with them.”When one closely looks into this story, one cannotsay that she had made clothing for these widows.There is no sign at all of it. Dorcas might also be oneamong the widows. They could have been doinggood works together by making clothing and robesfor the poor and for the disciples of the Lord. Ofcourse, this does not mean that all widows were rich.One can only say that widows were not always poorand surviving on alms.

When we read Acts 6:1 in the context of theprevious chapters, it would be very strange tothink that a group of Greek widows were ne-glected from the distribution of goods. Acts 2:45and 4:35 inform us that everyone had accordingas he had need. It is surprising to hear that agroup of widows all of a sudden were neglectedand left in poverty. If this were true, there wasracial discrimination in the first congregation!However, there is no trace of this at all, for thecongregation was united in the Lord. Therefore itis unreasonable to say that the murmuring of theGreeks broke out because their widows were ne-glected in the distribution of financial assistance.The Greeks murmured for another reason.

There is a possibility that “the daily ministra-tion” does not mean “daily care for the needy” butsomething different. Pay careful attention to whatthe twelve said to the multitude of disciples wheninstructing them to look out for seven men. The

apostles wanted them “to serve at tables,” so thatthey might devote themselves to prayer and tothe ministry of the Word (vs. 2). Thus we noticethat the point of the whole matter was “tableservice.” From the “table” in verse 2 “the dailyministration” (vs. 1) gets a new meaning.

16 If one

accepts this new meaning, it is clear that thereason for the Greek murmuring was not becausetheir widows were neglected in the material dis-tribution but because their widows were beingneglected when it came to serving at these tables,dispensing mercy. It was well known that the firstcongregation had the daily table service. Acts 2:46says, “And day by day, attending the temple to-gether and breaking bread in their homes, theypartook of food with glad and generous hearts . . .”(see also 5:42; “every day”). The daily table was thetable of the communion meal, and at the sametime a meal for the needy. In that time the congre-gation in Jerusalem grew fast and the twelveapostles could not sufficiently manage the distri-bution of alms and the daily table service alone.“Every day in the temple and at home” they hadmeetings and communion meals. Believers hadmeetings not merely in one home, but in manyhomes and at many places. Obviously they had tohave some helpers. At the daily meeting and thetable service some Hebrew widows could havebeen involved in the proper administration of thecommunion meal as helpers. For this ministry theGreek widows were thoughtlessly bypassed, andneglected. It is difficult to say what sort of capac-ity the widows had in that time. One thing how-ever, is sure, they performed a positive ministra-tion at the daily meeting and table. One may seehere in Acts 6 a glimmering of the widows (dea-conesses?) of 1 Timothy 5. Here one can safely saythat women were endowed with spiritual giftsand the widows were employed for the welfareand upbuilding of the Church of the Lord, eventhough it is difficult to say in what capacity thewidows served at the daily table. It, however, iscertain that they were helpers of the daily table,and were a sort of deaconess.

4. HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

Thus far we have seen that women were activelyinvolved in the congregational life of the apostolic

16 See Van Bruggen, p. 67. Read also pp. 65-72 “De taakvan ‘De Zeven’” (Handelingen 6:1-7).

WOMEN IN OFFICE


Church. There is some evidence that deaconesses ofsome form existed.

This apostolic practice was continued in theearly Christian Church. Traces can be found in earlyChristian history. Pliny, a Roman mayor, who wassent by Trajan to Bythynia mentions in his letter twofemale slaves who were called “deaconesses”(ministrae).

17 It was evident that these two women

had an office in the church, because they were calleddeaconesses. Until the 5th century traces of femaledeacons can be found. In a letter of the well-knownpreacher Chrysostomos (5th century) we come acrossa rich and faithful woman, Olympias, who was afemale deacon.

18

In the time of the Reformation Calvin intro-duced female deacons in the Church of Geneva. Asmentioned already, Calvin understood the real wid-ows of 1 Timothy 5 to be deaconesses, and he in-stalled the office of the care of the poor. ReformedChurches in Europe followed his example and haddeaconesses until the office gradually disappearedafter the 17th century. The convent of Wezel (1568),which was an assembly of the Reformed churches incaptivity, decided that female deacons could beintroduced. In 1578, after the return from captivity,a congregation in Amsterdam actually had femaledeacons.

5. CONCLUSION

From this study it can be concluded that womenwere involved in the ministry of the church, notexcluded from it. They were members of the body ofChrist (Galatians 3:26-28; 1 Corinthians 12:27) andwere endowed with spiritual gifts to serve the bodyof Christ (1 Corinthians 12:4, 27).

However, there is a distinction between the roleof men and that of women both in married life andin church life. Women are not allowed to exerciseauthority over men. This is a clear command of theScriptures (1 Timothy 2:11-14; 1 Corinthians 14:33-36). According to this instruction they are not per-mitted the office of elder which exercises authorityover men by discipline and by preaching the gospelin public.

However, the ministry of Christian mercy andassistance for the well-being of the congregation canbe performed by them. As this paper has noted,traces of female services to the congregation can befound. In regards to the capacity of the female min-istry nothing can be said with absolute certainty.Nevertheless, it can be assumed with confidencethat in the apostolic church there were deaconesses(the women in 1 Timothy 3:11 and Romans 16:1), andfemale assistants (the widows in 1 Timothy 5 andActs 6). It is not clear whether the real widows in 1Timothy 5 were deaconesses. They seem to havebeen in a different category from the other women(deaconesses), because relatively strict rules wereapplied to them—they should be no less than sixtyyears of age and could not remarry, thus their posi-tion was permanent. This differentiation howeverdoes not affect at all the fact that women wereemployed for the upbuilding of congregational lifein the church.

Finally, the issue is whether there is a commandto have female deacons or whether it is permitted tohave female deacons in the church today. The insti-tution of eldership (bishop) is a matter of the com-mand of the Lord (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5), and it mustexist in the church. However, the office of deacon isdifferent from the office of elder. In the Scripturesthere is no command to ordain deacons, we aremerely told of their existence and their require-ments. However, the installation of the office ofdeacon seems to be a right, even obligatory, becauseScripture deals with elders and deacons in a parallel-ing fashion (1 Timothy 3:2-13; Philippians 1:1) andthey were offices in the apostolic church.

The case of deaconesses is different from thesetwo offices. If one accepts the existence of femaledeacons in the early church, it can in principle beconsidered along with male deacons. But the institu-tion is not a matter of command, not even when itcomes to male deacons. When we do acknowledgethe office of deaconess, it is difficult to indicate whatits precise relationship is to the office of the maledeacon. There is a possibility that deaconesses wereassistants of deacons, because, even in the field ofministration, leadership is necessary. Taking suchthings into consideration one needs to be very cau-tious in approaching the matter of female deaconry.

The installation of female deacons may not be amatter of obligation for the church, because its exist-

17 Plinius Minor, Epistulae X, 96.8 (A.D. 112 or 113).

18 Edition in Sources Chretinnes 13bis (A.M. Malingrey,1968).



ence cannot be proved with absolute certainty in theScriptures. However, one cannot disregard it be-cause there is very positive evidence for its existence,and many sisters were employed for the well-beingof the Church of the Lord. Therefore, when a Churchintroduces female deaconry, one can not say that it isunscriptural. But there must be a clear distinctionbetween eldership and deaconry, and between maleand female deacons. In the Scriptures there is evi-dence for the ordination of elders (1 Timothy 4:14;Acts. 14:23), but there is no clear evidence for theordination of deacons.

19

In regards to female deacons it is even moreunclear than male deacons. Therefore, it is advisablethat a distinction be made between male and femaledeacons. The Korean Churches have had deacon-esses for a long time. But there is a clear distinctionbetween male deacons and female deacons. Maledeacons are ordained with the laying on of hands bythe session (presbyterium), but female deacons arenot ordained as such. Male deaconry is permanentbut female deaconry bears the character of a tempo-rary office (a one year term). Female deacons func-tion as assistants to the male deacons.

20 This institu-

tion was not introduced due to the influence of a newhermeneutic, but for the efficient functioning ofcongregational life and the upbuilding of the Church.

It can be said that the institution of femaledeaconry in Korean Churches is based on Scripturalprinciples. The Church of the Lord is living in theapostolic teaching and tradition. It is very importantto preserve this teaching in a changing world. How-ever, there is also some risk that a church is tootenaciously bound to its own tradition which wascreated in special historical circumstances. It is aduty of the Church of the Lord to continually searchthe Word of God under the enlightenment of theHoly Spirit and to persistently reform the life of theChurch according to the norm of the Scriptures.When it is found necessary to change well-estab-lished practices for the well-being of the congrega-tion and in accordance with Scriptural principles,one should take the resolute step of breaking withtradition. In this regard some Reformed Churchesseem to have some weakness in their zeal to be aguardian of Reformed tradition. This can be saidalso in regards to deaconesses in the church. There iscertainly no command of the Lord nor absoluteevidence for the installation of this office, but theScriptures clearly point in that direction and givesome positive evidence. So it seems good for thewell-being of the Church of the Lord that she employwomen for the edification of the Church accordingto the Scriptures.

19 It is not clear whether the Seven, who were ordainedwith the laying on of hands, were deacons. They werenever called as such and there is no evidence that theyperformed diaconal service after their ordination. Two ofthem, Stephen and Philip, are also known to us as preacheror evangelist (Acts 7; 8:4-40; 21:8). They were ordained inorder to administer and supervise the daily ministration(table service) because there was murmuring from theGreek people for their widows. It is possible that the of-fice was installed as a temporary measure, because nosucceeding persons are found just as in the apostles' case.See Van Bruggen, pp. 66-75.

20 Korean deaconesses also assist in the pastoral works ofthe minister of the Word by visiting the members of theirward. They also assist office bearers in the congregationalservice on Sunday by receiving people at the entrance ofthe church and assisting with the collection during thechurch service. Besides the female deacons there arefemale exhorters whose office is permanent thoughwithout ordination. This office in principle belongs to atemporary offce. The requirements for this office,however, are more strict than those for female deacons.They must be at least 45 years old (not over 60!). Theirfunction is to visit from house to house and to report tothe ministers of the Word. Their ministry is subservientto the pastoral work of the ministers. This institution issimilar to that of the real widows in 1 Timothy 5, eventhough most of them are not widows at all!

Dr. Soon-Gil Hur is a minister of thePresbyterian Church in Korea [Kosin].He graduated from Kosin Seminary in1960, was a pastor 1962-1966, did aTh.M. at Kampen, graduating in 1969and received a Th.D. from Kampen in1972. He pastored a Free ReformedChurch in Australia 1978-1987, was aprofessor at Kosin Seminary from 1972-1977, was President 1988-94 and iscurrently an adjunct professor at KosinSeminary. He has published a number ofbooks and articles. His doctorate atKampen was titled “Presbyter in vollerechten; het debat tussen Charles Hodgeen James H. Thornwell over het ambtvanouderling.”Ê

Wednesday, Oct. 14th, 1998 was the centenaryof John Murray’s birth. Whether or not numbersdivisible by ten are more important than others (abiblical case can be made for multiples of seven),such anniversaries do provide an opportunity toreflect on the contributions of saints who havegone before us. And because of Professor Murray’saccomplishments at Westminster Seminary, asidefrom his own ministry in OPC, this date invites usto acknowledge the debt Orthodox Presbyteriansowe to the man from whom two generations ofOPC ministers learned systematic theology.

Professor Murray was the youngest of eightchildren born to Alexander and Catherine Murray,a poor, Free Presbyterian Church family who livedin the Highlands of Scotland. Their accommoda-tions were so modest that Murray shared a bedwith his two sisters until he turned six, at whichpoint he opted to sleep with his five brothers. As aboy, he was no saint; one biographer relates thestory of how Murray set fire to a stack of oatsbeside the family home and proceeded to denyhaving anything to do with it. But he also grew upnever having known himself to be outside thecovenant of God’s grace. Unlike his father, Profes-sor Murray never experienced a conversion. Theways of the Presbyterian home in which he wasreared stayed with him throughout his life.

One of the old lines about Murray, who worea glass eye, was that if you wanted to determinewhich eye was real, you should look for the onethat had the trace of a smile — that was the glasseye. He lost his right eye while fighting in WorldWar I as a member of The Black Watch, a war thatalso took the lives of two of Murray’s brothers.After the war Murray went on to study at theUniversity of Glasgow where he enjoyed math andtheology, and in choosing between the two de-cided to pursue the ministry. To prepare for that

The Forgotten John Murray(October 14, 1998 - May 8, 1975)

by

D. G. Hart and John R. Muether


calling, Murray left Scotland to study at PrincetonTheological Seminary. Though he did well — wellenough to earn a fellowship for graduate study —Professor Murray’s intent was always to return toScotland and serve in a parish of the Free Presbyte-rian Church.

The door to ministry closed, however, after hisgraduation from Princeton and during his advancedstudies at New College, Edinburgh. While in Scot-land Murray preached often and pursued licensureand ordination in the Free Presbyterian Church. Buta controversy had erupted over whether churchmembers could use public transit to attend worshipservices on the Lord’s Day. The Free PresbyterianChurch ruled that such transportation violated theteaching of the Fourth Commandment and disci-plined one particular minister for publishing a bookentitled, May Sabbath-Keeping Prevent Church-Going.Murray disagreed with the church’s decision eventhough he was a strong sabbatarian. He believed thepoor’s use of public transit to attend worship wascompatible with the Shorter Catechism’s teachingon acts of “necessity and mercy.” Unable to enforcethe church’s rule, Murray had to find an alternative,which he did when Caspar Wistar Hodge, the chairof the department of theology at Princeton Semi-nary, invited him to teach there as an instructor insystematic theology. He taught at Princeton, withsome distress, for the academic year of 1929-1930was the first year of Westminster’s existence. Thenext year he joined the faculty at Westminster, andthe rest, as they say, is history. But not quite. Afterthirty-six years of teaching at Westminster, and afterserving as a minister in the Orthodox PresbyterianChurch for thirty years, Murray retired from hisduties in the United States and returned home. Atwhich point, at the age of 68 he married, fatheredtwo children, preached and lectured throughout theGreat Britain, and for the last three years of his life,pastored a small Free Church only two miles from


The Forgotten John Murray

the place of his birth. He died on May 8th, 1975 aftera quick and painful bout with cancer.

According to Sinclair Ferguson, Murray’s de-meanor in the classroom and on campus seemedaustere, which explains in part the joke about hisglass eye being the one that twinkled. But Murraywas not without a sense of hu-mor, such as the time when stu-dents in Machen Hall were mak-ing too much noise and he camedown the stairs from his suiteand rather than looking in on thestudents who could tell by thefootsteps that Murray was ap-proaching, took out his glass eye,positioned it in his fingers, andthen poked it instead of his headaround the corner of the doorjam, signaling his displeasurewith the racket. In keeping withHighlands piety Murray was alsoknown to enjoy a cigar and Scotch whiskey, thoughhow he drank while living on dry campus mightqualify as one of life’s great mysteries. And thenthere is the story of how after the observance of theLord’s Supper Professor Murray would go up to thetable and dispense the remaining bread and wine tothe children in order to underscore the point thatthese elements were not holy in themselves.

But Professor Murray was not a favorite of thestudents nor did he gain an international reputationfor his humor or for his habits of relaxation. He wasa first-rate theologian who carried on the Princetontradition of doing systematic theology exegetically.At the heart of Murray’s writings was the work ofGod’s grace. To put it another way, explaining themechanics of grace was the motive behind the tril-ogy of books through which Professor Murray es-tablished his reputation. In 1954 he wrote The Cov-enant of Grace. He followed that up a year later withRedemption — Accomplished and Applied and finishedhis study of the covenant in 1959 with The Imputationof Adam’s Sin. Finished is probably too strong sincehis two-volume commentary on Romans, perhapsMurray’s greatest work, was written during the

years that he wrote this trilogy and his exegesis ofPaul’s epistle directly informed his understandingof the covenant of grace, the imputation of Adam’ssin, and the sufficiency of Christ’s mediatorial work.

In fact, Murray’s commentary on Romansstands as a monument to the tradition of systematic

theology practiced at Princeton andWestminster which extends all theway back to Charles Hodge whoalso wrote a commentary on Ro-mans. The theologians associatedwith West-minster and the OPChave been unusual in their abilityto write both commentaries andsystematic theology when typicallyit has been the biblical scholarswho produce the commentariesand the theologians who write thesystematics. Murray’s accomplish-ment was all the more unusualwhen we take into account his ethi-

cal writings, the first of which was a study ofdivorce, published initially in 1953, and then hisPrinciples of Conduct, published in 1957. These booksdemonstrate not only the practical aspect ofMurray’s theological interests, but also reflect hiswork as a churchman since his book on divorce wasoriginally written for and published by the Com-mittee on Christian Education of the OPC.

Yet, there is one area where Professor Murrayis almost entirely disregarded. This is ironic sincehis stature remains so high and his writings are stillread by most OPC ministers. To be sure, no one isinfallible. But it is odd that someone who is deemedso wise on almost all the subjects about which hewrote could be brushed aside on one particulartopic. That subject is exclusive psalmody, a topicthat cannot be ignored if we would do full justice toMurray’s convictions and practice.

Murray, of course, came from a church wherepsalms were the rule — all Presbyterians do for thatmatter. It is just that the Free Presbyterian Churchhas held on to the Reformed tradition of song incorporate worship longer than most Presbyterian

These books demonstrate

not only the practical as-

pect of Murray’s theo-

logical interests, but also

reflect his work as a

churchman since his book

on divorce was originally

written for and published

by the Committee on

Christian Education of the

OPC.

10 Ordained Servant — Vol. 8, No. 1

The Forgotten John Murray

denominations in America. Professor Murray wasconvinced, just as many Reformed and Presbyteriantheologians were before him, that the Bible requiredthe singing of psalms in corporate worship. Hisargument, like all of his theology, was grounded inthe text of Scripture. He examined all the instancesof song in the New Testament and found that on allsuch occasions the New Testament church wouldhave sung only psalms in corporate worship. Forinstance, when our Lord instituted the sacrament ofthe Lord’s Supper, at the end of the ceremony hesang a hymn with his disciples, and that hymn wasthe cycle of Psalms from 113 to 118. In 1 Cor 14 Paulalso talks about song in the assembly of the churchand Murray argued that the songs the church sangwere psalms. Finally, he looked at Eph 5:19 and Col3:16 where Paul exhorts believers to sing psalms,hymns and spiritual songs. But Murray did notthink that the words, hymns and spiritual songs,referred to songs other than the psalms. Instead, heargued that hymns and spiritual songs designatedparticular sections of Israel’s psalter, in which casePaul was commending psalms for the edification ofbelievers.

Now, there are many who will say that Profes-sor Murray’s exegesis was flawed at this point andthat he may have been guilty of reading back intothe text the grounds for his own practice. Andcertainly, the exegetical case is not air tight. But suchconcessions do not counter one of Murray’s mainpoints, which is the value of singing God’s inspiredword in praise to God. If we believe that THEinspired Word is better than uninspired words, inother words, if we take our doctrine of the inspira-tion of the Bible seriously, it would appear that thewords inspired by God for the purpose of his praiseare better than the efforts of uninspired writers. Ofcourse, the verse of metrical psalms is not inspired,but neither are the translations of the Bible that weread in corporate worship as the Word of God. Andan even greater concern is that the psalms do notreflect the fullness of God’s revelation in the NewTestament. But if Christ is everywhere present inthe Bible, as Reformed biblical scholars teach, and ifthe songs of praise in the book of Revelation are anypattern, not only for new covenant worship but also

for worship in glory, then we may find that thepsalms are just as full of God’s revelation as anyother part of Scripture.

Aside from the aesthetic argument that theform of praise that pleases God most is his owninfallible word, there are pragmatic considerationsthat tip the scales in Murray’s favor. One is thecurrent battle that is going on in our churches overmusic in worship. If we all sang only psalms theworship wars would end. Neither side would behappy, but at least the debates over praise songsand traditional hymns would cease. Then there isthe consideration that comes from the life of Profes-sor Murray himself. Many of the people who vis-ited him as he died from cancer remember Murrayleading his friends in the singing of psalms. Dyingwords can make for stirring conclusions to biogra-phies. Certainly, among the last words spoken bybelievers, J. Gresham Machen’s telegram to Profes-sor Murray has to rank well up there — “the activeobedience of Christ, no hope without it.” But evenbetter may be those of a saint who takes comfortfrom the words of Scripture in song and at the sametime sings praise to his God and redeemer.

Maybe exclusive psalmody is not required inScripture. But until we know the psalter as well asProfessor Murray did, until we know which psalmsto sing for comfort, which to sing for praise, whichto sing for confession of sin, we may want to thinkabout singing only the psalms. This may not be asufficiently principled reason, but sometimes thelives of saints are more persuasive than the mostcareful exegesis or the keenest logic.

D. G. Hart and John Muether arecoauthors of Fighting the GoodFight, A Brief History of theOrthodox Presbyterian Church. Bothare OPC ruling elders — Mr. Hart atCalvary OPC, Glenside, PA and Mr.Muether in Lake Sherwood OPC, inOrlando, FL.

Part II.

The Epistemological ProblemWith Evolutionary Science

1. Evolutionary Science contradicts the “scientificmethod” of true science by assuming certain pre-suppositions about ultimate reality but claimingthat it begins with observable phenomena.

The Scientific Method

The problems in the debate between Evolution-ists and Creationists stem from a failure to addressthe more fundamental epistemological issues.

It is critical then to focus on the “scientificmethod” established and espoused by scientiststhemselves. In Darwin on Trial Phillip Johnson makesa clear statement that nicely sums up the basicattitude of this method: “the evidence must beevaluated independently of any assumption aboutthe truth of the theory being tested.”41 In overturn-ing a 1981 Arkansas statute requiring “balancedtreatment to creation-science and to Evolution-sci-ence” Federal District Judge William Overtonsummed up five essential characteristics of science:[McLean vs. The Arkansas Board of Education]42

1. It is guided by natural law;2. It is explanatory by reference to natural law;3. It is testable against the empirical world;4. It’s conclusions are tentative - that is not

␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ ␣ necessarily the final word; and5. It is falsifiable.

Evolutionary Scientist Stephen Jay Gould praisedOverton’s opinion: “Judge Overton’s definitions ofscience are so cogent and so clearly expressed thatwe can use his words as a model for our ownproceedings.”43

The first two criteria are misleading to the gen-eral public. “Natural law” is not something inher-ent in nature but a human construct based onempirical observation and experimentation. Therecurrence of certain apparent cause and effect rela-tionships is called a “law.” This is another way ofsaying that there is observable order in the world.But the phenomena of observation do not comewith labels or references to a Law Book of NaturalStatutes. In fact, a natural law is really a principle ofhigh probability based on repeated observationand prediction. Accordingly natural laws are al-ways being revised. “Scientific laws don’t gener-ally explain or cause natural phenomena, theydescribe them.”44 It is because of this tentativenessthat Judge Overton indicated that scientific conclu-sions cannot be considered the “final word.” It isalso the reason for the fourth principle that a hy-pothesis must be testable and the fifth principlethat it must be falsifiable.

Karl Popper is well known for championing theprinciple of falsifiability. He believed that the theorywhich explains everything explains nothing. “Thewrong view of science betrays itself in the cravingto be right.”45 The search for confirming evidenceonly betrays prejudice for the theory. The dis-missal of evidence that challenges the hypothesisundermines the scientific enterprise. References tothe “fact of Evolution” betray a denial of the “falsi-fiability criterion”. Popper once wrote that “Dar-winism is not really a scientific theory becausenatural selection is an all-purpose explanationwhich can account for anything, and which there-fore explains nothing.”46 Johnson observes: “Whatthey [Darwinists] never find is evidence to contra-dict the common ancestry thesis, because to Dar-winists such evidence cannot exist. The ‘fact ofEvolution’ is true by definition, so negative in-formation is uninteresting, and generally


Evolution: The Materialist Juggernaut

A Christian ChallengePart 1

byGregory Edward Reynolds, M. Div. © 1997



unpublishable. If Darwinists wanted to adoptPopper’s standards for scientific inquiry, they wouldhave to define the common ancestry thesis as anempirical hypothesis rather than a logical conse-quence of the fact of relationship. ...Popper was towarn that ‘Confirmations should count only if theyare the result of risky predictions.’ (Popper usesEinstein’s General Theory of Relativity as an ex-ample of risky) If Darwin had made risky predic-tions about what the fossil record would show aftera century of exploration, he would not have pre-dicted that a single ‘ancestral group’ like the ther-apsids and a mosaic like Archaeopteryx would bepractically the only evidence for macro Evolution.”47

Darwin himself insisted that the problem withthe fossil record of his day was the inadequacy ofthe record and not the inadequacy of his theory: “Ido not pretend that I should ever have suspectedhow poor a record of the mutations of life, the bestgeological section presented, had not the difficultyof our not discovering innumerable transitionallinks between the species which appeared at thecommencement and close of each formation, pressedso hardly on my theory.”48 Scientist Stephen JayGould lets the epistemological cat out of the bagwhen he baldly states “human beings evolved fromape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’sproposed mechanism or by some other, yet to beidentified.”49 In light of such unscientific assertionsthe Piltdown Man scandal should not surprise any-one.

Scientific findings are, by their very nature, al-ways subject to revision, sometimes even to com-plete reversal. For example, the mechanisticworldview of Newton has been sharply revised inlight of the observations of Einstein and Heisenberg.Why then do Darwinists so often speak and write insuch an unscientific way?

The Limits of the Scientific Method

Thomas Kuhn and his epoch making (1970)work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions may helpus to understand. Kuhn maintains that “scienceemploys paradigms as organizing concepts in guid-ing research.”50 A paradigm is not merely a theory or

hypothesis, but a worldview, a culturally preju-diced way of looking at the world. In other words allso-called “facts” are viewed from a perspectivemade up of certain presuppositions about the waysthings are. This worldview is the historical, intellec-tual context in which science functions. Many, if notmost, scientists are not aware of this epistemologi-cal given. Thus their lack of epistemological self-awareness leads them to “attempt to force natureinto the preformed and relatively inflexible box thatthe paradigm supplies”. Furthermore, phenomenathat do not “fit the box are often not seen at all.”51

When enough scientists observe enough evi-dence that doesn’t fit the conventional wisdom a“crisis” occurs. Michael Denton in Evolution: ATheory in Crisis claims that the Evolutionary para-digm is in the midst of just such a crisis. Since aparadigm is not a single hypothesis or theory it isnot falsifiable in the same way.52 Thus as crisisgives way to a new or revised paradigm it againtakes on the characteristics of what Kuhn callsnormal science. It is, therefore, epistemologicallynaïve to refer to Evolution as a fact, or even toscientific knowledge as certain, as in the phrase“the assured results of science”. One would needto be infinite in order to make apodictic state-ments about present reality, not to mention pastreality. The point is that no observer of anythingis without bias. As evolutionary historian MichaelRuse observes, “nearly all of us come to evolutionthrough the popular realm - it is not as if we get adisinterested introduction to the subject.”53

2. Evolutionary Science makes truth claimsthat are beyond its competence.

By failing to recognize or admit the existence ofan assumed paradigm scientists often speak as ifscience not only discovers truth, but that science isthe only source of true knowledge. Thus Creation-ism is written off as a matter of faith, as if scientists,particularly materialistic scientists, do not assumeany ultimate principles, which are not empiricallyverifiable. So virile is this faith that its suppressionand denial of recent cosmological alternatives toDarwinism borders on fanaticism, the very thingthey claim to fear so in their opposition.

A Christian Challenge


Darwinism or Scientific Naturalism is rooted ina philosophy of Materialism which asserts that all ofreality is physical or material. There is no spiritualor mental reality. What appears to be mind is actu-ally explicable in material terms. This is similar toancient Monism, which sought to explain all ofreality in terms of a single principle, e.g. Thalesclaimed that “all is water.” Thus Darwinism is an allencompassing worldview or religion. Speaking atthe centennial celebration of the publication of TheOrigin of Species, in 1959 Julian Huxley enthusiasti-cally asserted: “This is one of the first public occa-sions on which it has been frankly faced that allaspects of reality are subject to Evolution. ...In theEvolutionary pattern of thought there is no longereither need or room for the supernatural. The earthwas not created, it evolved. So did all the animalsand plants that inhabit it, including our humanselves, mind and soul as well as brain and body. Sodid religion ...Finally, the Evolutionary vision isenabling us to discern, however incompletely, thelineaments of the new religion that we can be surewill arise to serve the needs of the coming era.”54

Now let us look at the basic tenets of thisworldview, Evolutionary Materialism.

#1 - The Exile of God

David Asman, the editor of the editorial page ofThe Wall Street Journal recently rejected an op-edpiece I submitted because I asserted that Darwin-ism is inherently Atheistic. In response I pointedout that simply because some people are inconsis-tent in their reasoning, and therefore posit what isknown as Theistic Evolution, is no reason to denythe truth of my assertion. Huxley said it in 1959 aswe just heard: “In the Evolutionary pattern ofthought there is no longer either need or room forthe supernatural.” Despite Darwin’s politic claimsto be an agnostic, he wrote to the recalcitrant CharlesLyell: “I would give nothing for the theory of natu-ral selection, if it requires miraculous additions atany one stage of descent.”55

In The Blind Watchmaker Dawkins comments: “InDarwin’s view, the whole point of the theory ofEvolution by natural selection was that it provided

a non-miraculous account of the existence of com-plex adaptations.”56 Stephen Hawking and CarlSagan are happy to reassert the Nietzschean conclu-sion that God is dead. “And so it was that the greatidea arose that there might be a way to know theworld without the god hypothesis.”57 Sagan sug-gests that we revere the Sun and stars. Dawkinssums it up best, “Darwin made it possible to be anintellectually fulfilled atheist.”58 Such Monism leadsnaturally to the second unproved assumption of theMaterialist.59

#2 - The Primacy of Matter(Cause and Effect in a Closed System)

Sagan insists that matter is eternal and that thisis the ultimate reality. In other words the universe isa closed system of material cause and effect. AsDavid Hume pointed out long ago the idea of causeand effect is unwarranted, and indeed impossible,on the basis of empirical knowledge. Based on theidea that all knowledge comes from empirical expe-rience, the idea of cause and effect relationships canonly be based on custom. Furthermore since wecannot experience the future, therefore all predic-tion is based on pure supposition. Empiricism failsbecause it assumes the existence of a mind and ideas(space and time) prior to experience, and yet claimsthat there are no ideas without experience. The ideaof cause and effect surreptitiously assumes whatcan only be the product of design. No wonderHume’s Empiricism leads to skepticism.

#3 - The Ultimacy of Chance (Random Universe)

In defining Evolution George Gaylord Simpsonsaid: “Man is the result of a purposeless and naturalprocess that did not have him in mind.”60 Chance isthe Prime Mover of the Evolutionary world.61

#4 - The Certainty of Empirical Knowledge

Carl Sagan nicely sums up the Evolutionist’sfaith: “First: there are no sacred truths; all assump-tions must be critically examined; arguments fromauthority are worthless. Second: whatever is incon-sistent with the facts must be discarded or revised.We must understand the cosmos as it is and not



confuse how it is with how we wish it to be.”62

The “facts”, of course are the infallible observa-tions of Evolutionists. The problem is that neitherof these two propositions is a fact. They are theway Evolutionists wish the cosmos to be.

None of the above dogma can be proved by thescientific method. This is reminiscent of the Logi-cal Positivists’ assertion that nothing is real ex-cept the empirically verifiable. This assertion isitself not open to empirical verification.

In Monad to Man: The Concept of Progress inEvolutionary Biology (1996) Michael Ruse con-cludes, “Not only has evolution functioned as anideology, as a secular religion, but for many pro-fessional biologists that has been its primary role.It has not been a mature (or proto-mature) sci-ence, governed by epistemic norms, nor has thatnecessarily been an end ardently sought.”63 “Evo-lutionists take their belief in scientific Progressand transfer it into a belief in organic progress.”64

Patrick Glynn, Resident Scholar of the Ameri-can Enterprise Institute, in a recent article in theNational Review (May 6, 1996) registered his as-tonishment over the fact that the revolutionarywork of cosmologist Brandon Carter in positinghis “Anthropic Principle” has been largely, andoften purposely, ignored by the majority of thescientific community: “... the a priori commitmentto the atheist notion of the random universe hasproved so powerful in our time as to send manyscientists scurrying to find logical, and some-times illogical, arguments to explain away themassive evidence that threatens to refute it.”65

This radical challenge to the hegemony of the“chance universe” of Darwinian thought has notcome from Christian theologians or “creation sci-entists” but from the heart of the scientific estab-lishment. The molecular biologist MichaelDenton’s Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985) andBerkeley law professor Phillip E. Johnson’s Dar-win on Trial represent a growing number of em-barrassing critiques of Darwinism. The doublestandard exhibited by the Evolutionists’ refusalto seriously consider the challenge belies a nar-

row-mindedness hitherto thought possible onlyin fundamentalists preachers who still defend theverdict of the Scopes trial. The fact that manyDarwinian scientists have asserted that a “ran-dom universe” is an hypothesis preferable to thatof belief in a supernatural design, elucidates thenature of their commitment.

Glynn laments this state of affairs: “The doublestandard at work here is breathtaking: a host ofscientists, from [Bertrand] Russell to RichardDawkins to Carl Sagan, are free to use loose sur-mises based on Darwin’s theory to buttress thepublic case for atheism; but the moment scientistsbegin marshaling rather considerable and per-suasive evidence for the opposite case, their specu-lation risks being branded by colleagues as “un-scientific”.66 The point is that all scientific inquiryand its conclusions, especially when it comes tocosmology, are debatable.

It must be evident by now that I am not deny-ing the validity of presuppositions per se. No onecan think, observe or experiment without them. Itis ironic to note, as Alfred North Whitehead onceimplied in Science and the Modern World (1925), thedependence of modern science on a Christianworldview. Modern science could not have arisenwithout the “medieval insistence on the rational-ity of God, conceived as with the personal energyof Jehovah... The faith in the order of naturewhich has made possible the growth of science isa particular example of a deeper faith.”67 Philoso-pher of Science Stephen Meyer notes: “Despitethe now well documented influence of Christianthinking on the rise of modern science from thetime of Ockham to Newton, much of science dur-ing the nineteenth century did take a decidedlymaterialistic turn.”68 Modern science arose in thecontext of belief in the distinction between theCreator and his creation. It assumed, therefore,that there is a discernible order in the creationthat could be explored and exploited for the ben-efit of mankind. Even the idea of progress is basedon a Christian view of history. Evolutionary sci-entists continue to assume a discernible order inthe world while denying the foundation for thisassumption. The result is a disturbing set of con-

A Christian Challenge


tradictions. Chance and order cannot co-exist.Man cannot be insignificant and responsible atonce. As we shall see it is precisely the intelligencediscernible in the order of the cosmos that cannotbe explained on the basis of Evolutionary assump-tions.

Science, evolutionary or otherwise, cannot bythe very nature of its methods and goals explainthe origin, sustenance or meaning of life.

It is, therefore, at the epistemological level thatthe debate between Evolutionists and Creationistsmust be understood and engaged. Only then canwe meaningfully discuss scientific inquiry at thephenomenological level.

41 Johnson, Darwin on Trial, 73.42 Ibid., 111, 112.43 Ibid., 184.44 Meyer, “The Origin of Life,” 39.45 Johnson, Darwin on Trial, 146, 147.46 Ibid., 21.47 Ibid., 152, 153.48 Ibid., 47.

Gregory E. Reynolds is presently serving asregional missionary for the Presbytery ofNew York and New England. He is currentlylocated in Manchester, New Hampshire.The third and concluding portion of thisessay will be included in the next issue ofOrdained Servant.

49 Ibid., 66, 67.50 Ibid., 118.51 Ibid., 119.52 Ibid., 120.53 Ruse, Monad to Man, 539.54 Johnson, Darwin on Trial, 150.55 Ibid., 33.56 Ibid., 162.57 T. M. Moore, “Beyond Creation vs. Evolution:

Taking the Full Measure of the Materialist Chal-

lenge,” Internet: Contra Mundum Root Page (1-

23-96 tew): 3.58 Johnson, Darwin on Trial, 9.59 Ibid., 4.60 Ibid., 114.61 Moore, “Beyond Creation vs. Evolution,” 4.62 Ibid., 6.63 Ruse, Monad to Man, 530.64 Ibid., 538.65 Glynn, “Beyond the Death of God,” 31.66 Ibid., 32.67 Alfred North Whitehead, Science and the Modern

World (New York: Macmillan, 1925), 19,24.68 Meyer, “The Origin of Life,” 24.59 Ibid., 4.

One of the duties of the minister is to “dothe work of the evangelist” so that his ministrywill be truly fulfilled, cf. 2 Tim. 4:5. Simply put,this means that no Christian ministry is com-plete without specific and earnest efforts tobring the Gospel to sin-ners with the goal of see-ing some, if not many,of them brought toChrist as Savior andLord. This work, we be-lieve, is accomplishedprimarily by preaching,for the Gospel preachedis God’s unique powerunto salvation to allthose who believe, cf.Rom. 1:16.

This Gospel preach-ing is to display the veryheart of God who freelycalls sinners to come toHimself. “Ho! Everyonewho thirsts, Come to thewaters; And you who haveno money, Come, buy andeat. Yes, come, buy wineand milk without moneyand without price. Whydo you spend money for what is not bread, and yourwages for what does not satisfy? Listen carefully toMe, and eat what is good, and let your soul delightitself in abundance.” Is. 55:1f. It ought to demon-strate through Christ’s representative the heartyoffer of Jesus Himself who cried, "Come to Me,all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will giveyou rest.” Matt. 11:28. Such preaching should bemarked by such apostolic fervor that it can sayboldly, truthfully, and freely, “Now then, we areambassadors for Christ, as though God were plead-

Pastor to Pastor:

The Riches of Spurgeon (pt. 3)by William Shishko


ing through us: we implore you (i.e. “we beg you”) onChrist's behalf, be reconciled to God.” 2 Cor. 5:20.And none of this zeal for a Gospel freely offered tosinners should be hindered by our commitment toCalvinism; indeed our belief that God does, in-

deed, have an elect whomHe will save by the minis-try of the Word should bethe great spur to our evan-gelistic energies.

Nevertheless, suchevangelistic zeal is (muchto our shame) far too un-common in Reformed pul-pits today. In some cases anon-evangelistic spirit cre-ates churches in which or-thodox ministers “preachto the choir” from week toweek (or perhaps it wouldbe better to say “from weakto weak”!). In other cases,reaction to superficial andmanipulative evangelismhas created the oppositeerror of doing no (or verylittle) evangelism. In stillother cases the frigid at-mosphere of “hyper-Cal-

vinism” has cooled or frozen the burden to pro-claim genuinely free grace to sinners. In most situ-ations, however, good ministers have been less theevangelists than they ought to be simply becausethey have not seen good models of evangelism thatis truly bound by the Word of God and done withinthe strictures of historic confessional orthodoxy.

As in so many other areas, Charles Spurgeonprovides a model that is rich with insight for andapplication to our own day. Spurgeon, “The Prince

SPURGEON’S CALL TO MINISTERSAS SOUL-WINNERS

“Do not close a single sermon withoutaddressing the ungodly, but at the sametime set yourself seasons for adetermined and continuous assault uponthem, and proceed with all your soul tothe conflict. On such occasions aimdistinctly at immediate conversions;labor to remove prejudices, to resolvedoubts, to conquer objections, and todrive the sinner out of his hiding-placesat once. Summon the church membersto special prayer, beseech them to speakpersonally both with the concerned andthe unconcerned, and be yourself doublyupon the watch to address individuals…Be well prepared for the appropriateseason “when kings go forth to battle.”

From “On Conversion as Our Aim”, inSpurgeon’s LECTURES TO MY STUDENTS


THE RICHES OF SPURGEON (Pt. 3)

of Preachers” was always “The Prince of Evange-listic Preachers.” In sermons that were second tonone in doctrinal content, often including linesand phrases that were bodies of divinity in minia-ture, Spurgeon never neglected pointed, personal,and passionate calls for his hearers to trust inChrist Jesus alone for salvation.

Even the reading of Spurgeon’s sermonsbrings a sense of the earnestness and urgencywith which Spurgeon pleaded with those whowere present under his actual preaching. He usedevery righteous motive to,without hesitation or embar-rassment, press the issues oflife and death, heaven andhell, everlasting bliss and ev-erlasting misery upon hishearers. Note the penetratingvividness of this conclusionto his sermon, “The Water ofLife”, preached in 1867. Alsopay attention to how thepreacher sensitively identifieshimself with his congregation,without ever giving up the role of the herald whospeaks in the second person to those gathered tohear the Word of the Lord:

God grant that there may be no…postponinghere, lest we postpone ourselves into eternity,where there are no acts of pardon past. May wehave Christ now. We may not live to seetomorrow’s sun. Albeit that the sun is well-nighgone down, yet the light of this evening may nothave gone before our life may be ended. Hownear to death we stand, and yet we scarcely thinkof it! Right on the edge of our graves sometimeswe are, and yet we sport and laugh as though wehad a lease of life! You forget death, most of you.The cemetery is so far out of town, but still youshould not quite forget, for the hearse goes to andfro with awful regularity, and the church bell thattolls is not rusty, and those words, “Earth toearth, dust to dust, ashes to ashes” are still famil-iar to the ears of some of us. It will soon be yourturn to die. You, too, must gather up your feet inthe bed, and meet your father’s God; God grant

that you may be found right with him. Little doI know for whom these sentences may have aspecial bearing; but they may have a bearing,dear friend, upon you. I see some of you dressedin black; you have had to go to the grave mourn-ing because of others: that black will be worn byothers soon for you, and the place that now knowsyou shall know you no more for ever. Oh! by thefrailty of life, by the near approach of the Master,or by the certainty of death, I pray you see to itthat you breathe the prayer, “Lord, give me of thygrace.” The Lord help you to pray it. Amen.”

Unlike evangelis-tic preachers who fall into thetrap of Arminianism,Spurgeon is clear that onlythe sovereign grace of Godcan truly bring a soul to faithin Christ. Yet, at the sametime, he makes memorableuse of the full range of moti-vations to call these souls todecision, e.g. the inevitabil-ity of death, the brevity and

unpredictability of life, the return of Christ. Howmuch this is like the wise father who tells bothbiological and spiritual children, “Do not boastabout tomorrow, For you do not know what a daymay bring forth.” (Prov. 27:1); and how well thisconforms to the apostolic model of an urgentmessenger imbued with the truth that “we mustall appear before the judgment seat of Christ, thateach one may receive the things done in the body,according to what he has done, whether good orbad.” and as a ministerial outflow can say, “Know-ing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuademen” (2 Cor. 5:10f.). Reformed ministers todaywho rightly stand against the manipulative tech-niques of evangelism based on flawed and erro-neous views of the human will should ask them-selves if, in throwing out the dirty bath water ofArminianism, they have also thrown out the babyof genuine biblical urgency in pleading with thelost. Spurgeon surely did not!

Spurgeon’s evangelistic calls appeared atsome point in every sermon. Like lightning that

In sermons that were sec-ond to none in doctrinalcontent, often includinglines and phrases that werebodies of divinity in minia-ture, Spurgeon never ne-glected pointed, personal,and passionate calls forhis hearers to trust in ChristJesus alone for salvation.

18 Ordained Servant — Vol. 8, No. 1

PASTOR TO PASTOR:

strikes in various places during a strong summerstorm, Spurgeon’s appeals to those who wereunconverted or undecided with respect to Christand the Gospel came at various places in hispowerful sermons: sometimes in the introduc-tion, periodically in the various points of hismessages, and very often at the conclusion. Thismaster preacher seemed to study to avoidsameness in both the place and manner of hisevangelistic applications. As a fisher of men hecast his net thoughtfully and drew it in alwaysanticipating a catch. And, following his owndictum that “genuine love to God and ferventlove to man make up the great qualification for apleader,” Spurgeon’s appeals were marked by atender earnestness that could not help but bringthe compassion of God to a congregation throughthe heart, mind, and energies of the preacher. Inthis excerpt from a sermon appropriately entitled“Earnest Expostulation”, based on Romans 2:4(Or do you despise the riches of His goodness,forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing thatthe goodness of God leads you to repentance?)one can feel the influence of a Minister who haspleaded with God for sinners before he pleadswith sinners for God:

“Weary, but not quite wearied out, O impenitentman, I plead with thee! Though thou hast so oftenbeen pleaded with in vain, once more I speakwith thee in Christ’s stead, and say – Repent ofthy sin, look to thy Saviour, and confess thy faithin his own appointed way. I verily believe that ifI had been pleading with some of you to save thelife of a dog I should have prevailed with you agreat while ago. And will you not care about thesaving of your own souls? Oh, strange infatua-tion – that men will not consent to be themselvessaved; but foolishly, madly, hold out against themercy of God which leads them to repentance.God bless you, beloved, and may none of youdespise his goodness, and forbearance, andlongsuffering.”

In our Reformed commitment to address thecongregation corporately as “saints” we may re-sist the concept of doing individual pulpit disci-pline by using terms such as “O impenitent man”,

but let us remember that Paul himself could say inhis address to the Galatians (4:19), “My littlechildren, for whom I labor in birth again untilChrist is formed in you” and to the Corinthians“Examine yourselves as to whether you are in thefaith. Test yourselves. Do you not know your-selves, that Jesus Christ is in you? -- unless indeedyou are disqualified. (II Cor. 12:5). While we mayreject what we believe to be Spurgeon’s approachto dealing discriminatingly with the congrega-tion as a “mixed multitude” of individuals, (actu-ally, dealing with the congregation as a de factogathering of sinners and saints), let us avoid theerror of dealing with the congregation under a defacto “presumptive regeneration.” Spurgeon waspossessed with the passionate heart of a passion-ate God who earnestly pleaded with His people:"Cast away from you all the transgressions whichyou have committed, and get yourselves a newheart and a new spirit. For why should you die, Ohouse of Israel? For I have no pleasure in thedeath of one who dies," says the Lord GOD."Therefore turn and live!" (Ezekiel 18:31f.). MayGod grant something of this passion to us, anddeliver us from the practice of excusing our owncoldness by criticizing the kind of heat givenforth by someone else.

(To be continued).

Bill Shishko, pastorOPC Franklin Square, [email protected]

For the past sixteen years Will-iam Shishko has served as pas-tor of the Franklin Square, NYcongregation of the OrthodoxPresbyterian Church. He is alsoserving, at present, as a memberof the Christian Education Com-mittee and of the Subcommitteeon Equipping Ordained Officerswhich is responsible for over-sight of this publication.

When you visit in the homes of your congrega-tion this coming year I predict that one of themore pervasive problems that you and fellowelders will note is the lack of family devotions.You will hear families who say they don’t have thetime, schedules too chaotic with working parentspassing each other like two ships in the night, orfathers who feel inadequate so they don’t feelcomfortable doing it…excuses excuses excuses.My own personal favorites were that my wifedidn‚t keep a Bible handy or that I had to go to aSession or Trustees meeting. Yes, that‚s right, toobusy with church work to lead my own little onesto Christ. Those excuses can be embarrassingcan’t they?

My fellow elders we do need to address theexcuses in our own lives if we are to deal withthose in the lives of the congregation. We need tolead by example. Pastor Bill Warren’s examplewas the most helpful to me as a young father andnew elder. He would have short devotions withhis family after each meal. Over the last dozenyears we have been able to develop consistencyin doing the same thing in our home. When we eattogether as a family we finish with Bible readingand prayer. Now my Bible sits within hand’sreach. My wife and children expect me to read andpray even if I need to be brief because of othercommitments. Needless to say, our enjoyment ofour God and even His glory have been advancedby these humble efforts.

As Orthodox Presbyterians we will be visitingin homes where the parents promised at the timeof their child’s baptism to instruct their childrenin the Reformed Faith, pray with and for them,deavor by all the means appointed by God to bring

them up in the nurture and admonition of theLord (Directory for Worship page 146). On thebasis of these promises elders may urge the flockto make use of family devotions as part of thefulfillment of those promises. Two of the threeordinary means of grace are at hand in familydevotions, and I do not believe that it is appropri-ate to shift all the responsibility for the nurture ofour children to the weekly church meetings or tothe Christian School. Christian households mustnecessarily reflect the glory of Christ that is inthe greater household, the Church, And since theChurch is marked by her devotion to Christ inprayer and attention to his Word so should theChristian family.

In our home visits we must encourage fathersto exercise headship in this area of family life andmothers to assist their husbands in this covenan-tal responsibility. There is a partnership thebalance of which must be maintained. Unfortu-nately it is often upset by the husband who shirkshis duty to lead mother and children, or con-versely the gifted mother who usurps the father’srole. As the visiting elders discuss with the familywhat they are doing for family devotions it wouldbe good to be prepared with ideas that can be ofhelp in various situations.

“Nourish the body, nourish the soul” is mysimple way of stating a concept that young thechildren can readily understand. For thousandsof years it has been the practice of devout Chris-tian homes to join the fellowship of breakingbread together with the fellowship of Bible read-ing, singing, and prayer. While this custom ap-pears to have fallen victim to dual income fami-lies, our American love affair with sports for all

E L D E R T O E L D E R

“Home Visitation and Family Devotions”

by

Ruling Elder David Winslow


ELDER TO ELDER


ages, not to mention endless electronic entertain-ments with little recreational value, it is oneworth preserving if at all possible. In our house-hold mother does the morning devotions at thebreakfast table before the children go off to schooland father does the evening devotions at thedinner table. The other time for family devotionswith young children is before the youngest goesoff to bed. That is a great time for gathering in thefamily circle for Bible reading and family prayer.

Materials for devotions can be an importantaid in helping make the family worship meaning-ful to all members. The Christian family musthave devotions that are Christ- centered. It isafter all the word of Christ that is to dwell in usrichly; He is our life, we have died with Him andour lives are now hidden in Him. We can no longerread our Old Testaments as if it were still 400 BC!The family that is in Christ is part of the newcreation; the old has gone the new has come withall the heavenly glory of the Son of God Himself.But doing this is not always as easy as one wouldthink since we seem to have almost a naturaltendency toward a moralistic approach to theexercise of our religion. This is true of much of thedevotional aide materials that are available aswell. Another problem is that so many books usepictures of Jesus to depict the biblical scenes ofHis life. We think this is more than unfortunate;it is a violation of the 2nd commandment asquestion 109 of the Larger Catechism clearlystates.

Three suggested aides for families:

The Child’s Study Bible by Catherine Vos.This is excellent with a theocentric/chistocentricapproach to the stories that probably reflects thefact that her husband G. Vos did a good job withhis own family devotions as well as assisted inediting the book. A razor can easily remove thepictures of our Lord without damaging the text.Good for ages 3-10 yrs.

Leading Little Ones to God by MarianSchoolland. Bible teachings (more than just sto-ries) covering who God is, the work of the Son and

the Spirit, the response of faith and obedience,prayer, and the ministry of the Church. Eachsection includes songs and suggested prayers.The text does contain pictures of Jesus which wesimply did not show to our children. Good for ages3-10 yrs

Promise and Deliverance by De Graff. Thisfour volume set covers the narratives of the Biblefrom Genesis to Acts. Designed to help Sundayschool teachers, De Graff’s basic approach is tosee that the narratives are given a redemptive-historical flavor that focuses on the Lord of theCovenant and His gracious saving of His peoplein Christ. This is very helpful material to usealong side reading through the Bible. Good forages 5-adult.

Questions for the Elders to consider:

1) Are our own “devotional houses” in order sothat we are examples to the flock?

2) What devotional materials can we as el-ders recommend to our members for their use?

Editor’s note: Ordained Servant would liketo publish a more complete list of devotionalmaterials in a future issue and would solicitsubmissions from our readers that include a verybrief review.

David Winslow serves as a ruling

elder in the Garden Grove

Orthodox Presbyterian Church,

Garden Grove, California. He is

a member of the General

Assembly’s standing Committee

on Christian Education and

serves on the Ministerial

Training Subcommittee.


In my experience (27 years now as a pas-tor, a few before that as a pew-sitter), thepeople most disturbed by noisy children aretheir own parents. Most of the rest of us are sograteful to have families with young childrenin our churches that we gladly tolerate theirnoise. Of course, some children are a problem.Usually they just need to be disciplined andtheir parents share in the blame for their dis-tracting behavior. But we must surely makeallowance for those who are just coming tounderstand the teaching of Scripture. Anotherobservation from my experience is that thesooner children are expected to sit (relatively)quietly through a worship service, the soonerthey are able to—and the sooner they actuallybegin to—"get something out of it." If we as-sume that young children can't handle "adult"worship (which may be saying something notvery good about our worship) and thereforesend them out of the place of worship, or outto some kind of ‘service’ tailored to them[Sesame Street style church, oh boy!], guesswhat? They soon come to expect "church" tobe entertaining. Well then: when they get to be5 or 6 are they going to want to join the bigpeople? All that has been accomplished bythis all too common practice is that the neces-sary time for adjustment has been postponeduntil they are bigger and can squirm and dis-tract even more effectively. I have seen this;it's not just theory. Also, in at least some ofthese cases, there is an underlying problem:Mom and Dad are letting junior call the shotsin life based on what he wants and what heenjoys.

About Children in the Worship Services of the Church

(A Reply to a Young Parent's Questions)

by Pastor David King

To deal with the matter with a little moresubstance: The church is a gathering of the cov-enant people of God. Our children—even thebabies—are part of that covenant community.When God's people meet for worship theypresent themselves before the Lord for His bless-ing and to bring offerings of praise and worshipto Him. And in his word the Lord does not say,"Adults only" when you come to worship Me.Quoting the Gospel passage about Jesus saying,"Let the children come to Me" is appropriate todiscussion of this matter. On that occasion hisdisciples took the view that the Lord had impor-tant things to teach and that a lot of noisy chil-dren would interfere with him doing so. But ourLord stopped everything to take even tiny chil-dren (Greek: βρεφη, infants [Lk. 18:15]) in hisarms and bless them and declare that the King-dom of God belongs to such as these…"adult"disciples take note!

Yes, it is a struggle sometimes with squirmy,high-energy young children. It was doubly sofor my wife, with our five children, because Icouldn't be in the pew to help her. She once said,"I don't think I've heard a whole sermon inyears." I understand, but that goes with theterritory; people should expect these things ifthey have babies! There are lots of things thathave to be dealt with that aren't necessarilypleasant or easy. But if you hang in there it won'tbe too long before your child will settle down(reasonably for a child). If you persevere, inother words, and don't get too hyper about ityourself, progress will be made. And that is notall: it seems that there is always some loving

21

David King is pastor of the

Christ Presbyterian Church, a

congregation of the Ortho-

dox Presbyterian Church in

Janesville, Wisconsin. This

material in this article was

originally part of an e-mail

response to questions on the

internet, and with permission

revised for Ordained Servant.

grandmother type who will welcome a chanceto help by holding one of the little ones—thisis especially true wh

Vol. 8, No. 1 O R D A I N E D S E R V A N T · 2020. 12. 21. · Kingsley Elder, Paul MacDonald,...

Documents

Transcript of Vol. 8, No. 1 O R D A I N E D S E R V A N T · 2020. 12. 21. · Kingsley Elder, Paul MacDonald,...