Thoughts of Francis Turretin: Sad Story

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Sad Story

Perhaps it would be good to pray for Pastor Timothy David Miller in this difficult time.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...: Sad story indeed and perhaps it would be that we should continue to pray not only for this Pastor but also according to the admonition Paul makes to Timothy in his letter that addresses the prayers of the Saints, all the others involved?

1Ti 2:1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people,
1Ti 2:2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.

Also being reminded of other Biblical examples of the resulting outcome of the "powerful" work of the earnest prayers of the Saints prayed as recorded for our learning in the book of Acts, maybe this incident rises to the same level of need:

Act 12:5 So Peter was kept in prison, but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church.
Act 12:6 Now when Herod was about to bring him out, on that very night, Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains, and sentries before the door were guarding the prison.
Act 12:7 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood next to him, and a light shone in the cell. He struck Peter on the side and woke him, saying, "Get up quickly." And the chains fell off his hands.

I just don't know? Maybe this circumstance rises to the same level of concord and civil disobedience as we see, here:

Act 4:18 So they called them and charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus.
Act 4:19 But Peter and John answered them, "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge,
Act 4:20 for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard."
Act 4:21 And when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way to punish them, because of the people, for all were praising God for what had happened.; Sunday, April 24, 2011 10:29:00 PM
Gordan said...: Wow I thought the Evangelical Fifth Column, reciting Romans 13:1-7 as if it was an unqualified absolute, would've been all over this by now.; Sunday, April 24, 2011 10:42:00 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Why did the courts award custody to the non-birth lesbian partner?; Monday, April 25, 2011 7:08:00 PM
Turretinfan said...: Normally, courts attempt to do what they believe to be in the best interest of the child.; Monday, April 25, 2011 9:47:00 PM
Anonymous said...: TUaD

I am not sure where you were going with that question?

I wonder though what your view was of Roman Law that the Lord submitted to and the Apostle Paul??

I don't want to speculate here though I am tempted to think by that question you might be disregarding the "powers" of the soul being moved upon by the Power of God's Will and Purpose and the outcome of the Judge's disposition that appears to have awarded the child to a "lesbian"? Why is that relevant?

I have in mind this verse:

Ecc 5:8 If you see in a province the oppression of the poor and the violation of justice and righteousness, do not be amazed at the matter, for the high official is watched by a higher, and there are yet higher ones over them.

Although I suppose we would both agree that Rome of Jesus' and Paul's day was being moved by demons, Satan himself being the prince of the world, acting very ungodly, still, their rule was still recognized as the Rule of God.

It seems to me that generally the ungodly nature of the ruler/Judge has no bearing on the outcome of the judgment rendered by the unjust and ungodly ruler/Judge, or, would you disagree?

Having commented that way I come back to the record I put forth earlier in the comments above where we clearly see the Spirit made it clear to Peter and John to disobey the civil authorities attempt to silence their ministry of evangelism.

In the case of this article was the issue here in your mind the Judge's attempt at silencing the Pastor's evangelism or his disposition remedying the Pastor's civil disobedience by harboring and rendering aid to a new convert and her daughter in violation of the laws the Judge had jurisdiction to uphold by upholding the law even though the woman was at one time a Lesbian? His ruling in favor of the Lesbian partner seems to be as TurretinFan indicated, a ruling that was in the mind of the Judge a ruling that was best for the child, not the parent?; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:21:00 AM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Why did the judge consider the non-birth "mother" to be a better mother than the birth mother?; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:22:00 AM
Paul Hoffer said...: Hi TUAD, the Court changed custody and awarded the non parent custody because the biological mother violated and ignored court orders pertaining to companionship (visitation) rights. The best interest of the child test tends to go out the window when a person dares to go against a court order. The court's dignity in their mind is more important than what is best for the child.

This ruling is merely the beginning of the nightmare caused by the legal chimera of recognizing same sex sexual liasions as marriages. The courageous example of this minister in choosing to do what is right morally over the law is a harbinger of what we all face as Christians. Even in this day, Our Lord provides opportunities for us to become martyrs.

God have mercy on the child!; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:47:00 AM
Anonymous said...: TUaD,

maybe the article sheds some light on the inner workings of the Judge's ruling in judgment:

"Courts in Vermont and Virginia have since ruled in favor of Jenkins on the custody issue, most recently in November 2009, when Rutland Family Court Judge William Cohen — frustrated by Lisa Miller's refusal to obey court orders — ordered her to surrender custody to Jenkins."

The Judge's patience was tried and he was frustrated.

Again, I hope the tenor of your inquest is for the ruling of justice not the moral fact, though repulsive as it is, that the ruling favored the Lesbian?; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:29:00 AM
The Thoughtful Pilgrim said...: Just a note to thank you for your research and your articles.

You would not, of course, remember me. But a long time ago you were very kind to me, and exhibited great patience and willingness to explain the doctrines of grace.

Over the years I have used your website often as a resource in debates with Roman Catholics, and as a source of comfort and encouragement. As I work at my own apologetic endeavours (present against Hyper-Preterism), I have learned much from yourself and Dr. White as regards to taking seriously the command to "answer with gentleness".

Keep up the good work. I certainly appreciate it.

Peace.; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:17:00 PM
Rhology said...: *Like* Paul Hoffer's comment.; Tuesday, April 26, 2011 5:03:00 PM
Ken said...: Also, maybe the judge also may have favored the partner who renounced homosexuality. ( I don't know.)

If so, there is still some remnants of Christian morality in some parts of our civil government.

Homosexuals should have never been allowed to adopt children either.

Lesbians are harder cases to deal with when the child is biological child of one of the Lesbians.

Paul Hoffer is right - this is a sad consequence of allowing any kind of same sex union contractual legal recognition. They are free to do to themselves what they want to in privacy. (sin) But in my opinion, there should be no marriage for them, and there should be no other kind of legal recognition (civil union, whatever).

If it were just "civil union"; they would have the same problems, in this case, it seems to me.; Wednesday, April 27, 2011 1:49:00 PM
Paul Hoffer said...: Hi Rev. Temple:

For clarification: the Christian woman refused to permit the still-lesbian partner companionship/visitation because she believed that such was antithetical to Christian morality by exposing her daughter to that sinful lifestyle.

God bless!; Wednesday, April 27, 2011 6:28:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Paul

you make a good argument. According to my Bible, we should all be ruled against for the very same reason!

Nothing there to bless!

Saint or sinner, we are all of a permanent sinful condition in this temporal life! That is why we live a cross life now in His Faith believing that we will be delivered from our temporal permanent human condition when we die putting on our Glorified Body then.

My hope is, as I suppose yours is, this:

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Again, my point is not that they were both lesbians and now one of them has had an experience that is leading her to Christ and so the Judge should use Christian moral ethics to rule by, but rather, the convert is in violation of the Law the Judge has jurisdiction of empowering him to rule the way he ruled.

Better minds should have prevailed, in my view, relying upon the power of God to turn the Judge's heart the way He can if we would just get out of the way, live by Faith and rely upon Him to bring about an outcome that brings Glory to God! For the new Christian convert, she will learn that all things will work for her good, in time, I suppose, even the Judge's ruling? As for the Pastor TurrentinFan asks that we consider praying for, he should by now have learned that?

Of course, your course is one of works righteousness and I understand that so it makes sense your reasoning as you have so aptly put it over in here in your comments.

To snatch an example of civil righteousness from Isaiah, I offer this:

Isa 5:15 Man is humbled, and each one is brought low, and the eyes of the haughty are brought low.
Isa 5:16 But the LORD of hosts is exalted in justice, and the Holy God shows himself holy in righteousness.

And as the Spirit has aptly put over for all of our considerations, Christ is a friend to publicans and sinners, for which I am grateful and without such friendship I would be lost to my own Christian morality/sinful lifestyle!

Mat 9:10 And as Jesus reclined at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were reclining with Jesus and his disciples.
Mat 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?"
Mat 9:12 But when he heard it, he said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
Mat 9:13 Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.' For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."; Wednesday, April 27, 2011 11:46:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Ken,

your response reminded me to tell you in my community here where I am a native son, it is still "against" the law to commit adultery!

Yes, in the year of our Lord, 2011, it is still on the civil legal code books that govern what a Police officer can do or not do when enforcing the laws. They still have the authority to enforce the violation of the marital vow when they have probably cause that one or the other gender is committing adultery!

I was a Police Chaplain for several years during the 1990's in my city and got to know the police officer who actually arrested a man caught in the act back in 1970! This law is still on the books and has not been rescinded.

Interesting as the story goes, the officer could only arrest the man because the woman was not married!

It is not against the law to fornicate. It is though when you commit adultery!!; Thursday, April 28, 2011 5:32:00 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Rhology: "*Like* Paul Hoffer's comment."

Ditto my thanks to Paul Hoffer's comment.; Thursday, April 28, 2011 9:35:00 PM
Turretinfan said...: Please just post a link, TU&D. That content is too graphic for this blog.; Friday, April 29, 2011 8:30:00 PM
Truth Unites... and Divides said...: Natamllc, please read the following:

Justified Civil Disobedience: Protecting a child from lesbianism.; Friday, April 29, 2011 8:40:00 PM
Turretinfan said...: Thanks, TU&D!; Friday, April 29, 2011 8:41:00 PM
Anonymous said...: TUaD

thanks for the link.

Ok, now what?

I asked: I am not sure where you were going with that question?

Ok, the link provides me some insights into where you were going with your question: Why did the courts award custody to the non-birth lesbian partner?

Ok, so now, will you answer the question I later on asked: Again, I hope the tenor of your inquest is for the ruling of justice not the moral fact, though repulsive as it is, that the ruling favored the Lesbian?

To establish where I am coming from with regard to the "Judge's ruling", here is where I am coming from, these verses:

Pro 16:1 The plans of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the LORD.
Pro 16:2 All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the spirit.
Pro 16:3 Commit your work to the LORD, and your plans will be established.
Pro 16:4 The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.
Pro 16:5 Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the LORD; be assured, he will not go unpunished.
Pro 16:6 By steadfast love and faithfulness iniquity is atoned for, and by the fear of the LORD one turns away from evil.
Pro 16:7 When a man's ways please the LORD, he makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.; Saturday, April 30, 2011 6:53:00 PM