New Covenant Patriarchy

Friday, January 25, 2008

New Covenant Patriarchy Discussion Group

In order to facilitate greater discssion amoung the readers of the book Man and Woman in Biblical Law, we have started a discussion group at:  If you have purchased and read the book we invite you to join the discussion.

I would like to add to the declaration that biblical polygyny is biblical and holy in the sight of the Lord.

In reference to David, a man after God’s own heart was declared righteous before the Lord. If we believe that the Holy Scriptures are of God and pure (Psalms 12:6-7) then we must submit our thoughts to what the Lord declared concerning David when stating: 1 Kings 15:4-5

Nevertheless for David’s sake did the Lord his God give him a lamp in Jerusalem, to set up his son after him, and to establish Jerusalem.

Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from ANY thing that he commanded him ALL the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.

Now we must ask ourselves is God ignorant of David’s sin of “polygamy” or was God fully aware of David’s 18+ wives even to the point HE gave them to David for a blessing? If God declared David followed ALL His commandments except with Bathsheba and Uriah then how could David be against God’s will in having multiple wives?

Brother Eric

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 01/25 at 12:39 PM
Commentary • (1) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, December 24, 2007

Monogamania: Never has so much depended on so little

Some bad theology and a lot of rebellion are all that hold up the charade of secular humanism.

In the Bible the patriarchs - God fearing men - ruling responsibly over their families according to God's LawWord are the model that God holds up as our example of righteousness. The denial of Biblical patriarchy by the church has made secular humanism the power it is today.

There are five aspects to Biblical Patriarchy:

1. arranged marriages (the father is responsible for the disposition of his sons and daughters in marriage with the consent of all),

2. the Biblical dowry (three years living wages paid by the man for a virgin),

3. patriarchal authority ( the rule and responsibility of the father of the household under God's LawWord),

4. the one-flesh nature of marriage (the disestablishment of church and state from marriage), and

5. potential polygyny (one man husbanding one or more wives).

The denial of each of these aspects of Biblical patriarchy has given secular humanism the crucial cooperation from baptized humanism it needs in order to exercise the power it wields. To see this clearly we must imagine what things might be like if Biblical patriarchy was once again understood to be righteous by Christians.

Secular humanism is simply the larger mirror of the reality of our family lives. Secular humanism does not take God's LawWord into account and neither do humanist Christians.

I spoke to a mother of a 17 year old girl yesterday and mentioned the importance of her father being involved in making sure she married the right guy and the 3 years wages a potential husband needs to bring to the table.

"That sounds very Old Testament," she said. 

"There is no such thing as the 'Old Testament'; that is just an evolutionary category imposed on Scripture," I informed her, "There are the Law and the Prophets, the Gospels and Epistles: the dowry is part of God's Law order for the family." 

"But we have done away with the sacrifices," she responded, shaking her head. 

"Right, but the dowry has nothing to do with the sacrificial system or the priesthood.  It is simply God's Law which Jesus came to reconcile us to.  Like He said, 'If you love me obey my commandments'."

Frankly, the situation we find ourselves in is this: rather than look to God's LawWord for our definition of right and wrong we look to our own reasoning.  This is what secular humanism does as well.  The laws of our country are made up without any deference to God's Law.  As we have denigrated the Law and the Prophets as being passé so has secular humanism denigrated the Constitution and our country's Christian heritage.

Christianity in the west is bound to be impotent as long as we view God's Law as impotent.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 12/24 at 01:59 PM
Contending for the Faith • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, December 17, 2007

New Covenant Patriarchy War on Terror

There were once two cities that were terrorized by God.  Not only did their two biggest buildings fall down but every building came down in a rain of fire and lava and ash.  Everybody was wiped out.  It did not have to happen.  Just ten men could have stopped it - not just any men but a particular kind of men.

Here is the whole story:

Genesis 18:20-33
And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; 
I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.  And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.  And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?  Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? 

And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. 
And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:  Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five?

And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it.  And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there.

And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake.  And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there.

And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there.  And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there.

And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake.  And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there.

And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.  And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place. 

Genesis 19:24-25 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;  And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.

So there you have it: for the lack of 10 good men we have the complete destruction of two cities. 

The moral of the story: Make sure you have at least 10 righteous (full of rightness) men in your city or county.  It can make all the difference in the world.

But what kind of "rightness" are we talking about here?  God defines that himself in His Law summarized by the Ten Commandments.  And to make sure we understood what those meant he gave us hundreds of minimum case law applications of those 10 commands.  Minimum case law applications means that if the law holds for this minimal case it certainly holds for even greater cases.

Here is an example: You shall not steal.  A minimum case law would be: Do not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.  We can safely say this applies to greater cases such as: do not neglect to pay the pastor of your church who ministers to you. 

It takes a lot of understanding of God's word to know what rightness consists of and then you have to apply it in practice to actually be righteous.  And if you can't do it you had better hope there are ten men in your area that do.  Because those 10 men may be all that stand between you and divine judgment, a truly terrible thing.

Posted by Tom Shipley on 12/17 at 12:50 PM
New Covenant Patriarchy ... • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Sunday, October 14, 2007

New Covenant Patriarchy and Relationships

Relationships with other people make us richer. Well, I should qualify that. Those relationships based on God’s Law make us richer. Those that are not make us poorer. All the relationships where all the parties to the relationship are in accord with God’s LawWord are win-win relationships. It is in this respect that I will use the terms lawful and lawless.

People become hermits and loners when they have been hurt too many times by lawless relationships.  Healing is needed and is available through Christ who bore the consequences of our lawlessness on Himself so we could be restored into a meaningful relationship with God.

People who are lawless find themselves quite lonely when they engage in lawlessness and thus destroy any meaningful relationships they have. The items in a garbage can are likewise meaningless in their relationship to anything else.  They no longer have a place or function in service to others.  This is hell.

The way of life and health and peace is one of meaningful service to others as ordered and regulated by the Guide to Relationships we know as the Bible.  This Guide will tell you how you are to relate to those who don't live by it as will as those who do.  It will tell you how to handle any type of relationship by giving you core principles (the Ten Commandments) as well as examples of how to implement those core principles (the case laws).

To bring home to your life just how this works you need to continually review the Guide in the light of those relationships you are involved in with your family, fellow church members, friends, and co-workers.  All of these reflect the most important relationship in your life, the one you have with God.  You have to get your relationship with God straight before anything else is going to get straightened out.

There are a huge number of aspects to our relationship with God but some are so fundamental that they deserve special consideration here:

  1. Authority/Subject - I am the Lord your God Exodus 20:2a - Being under lawful authority (as opposed to being under a lawless tyrant) means being under God's authority.  You may safely discount the authority of anyone whose authority is not based on submission to God's authority.  A rapist may coerce his victim to do his bidding but that does not make him her husband.  The state may make laws and regulations that fill many new volumes each year but that does not make it God.  God is the author of creation and history.  We are his subjects.

  2. Rescuer/Hostage - which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Exodus 20:2b - Our God is the one who rescues us from the criminal gangs who tyrannize us (coerce us lawlessly).

  3. One/Many - Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Exodus 20:3 - God insists that He is God alone, the ultimate and singular source of authority.  Thus we live in a universe, not a multiverse.  We are many but God is one.

  4. Jealous/Unconditionally Trusting - I the LORD thy God am a jealous God Exodus 20:5 - God names Himself Jealous, not that He is insecure, but that He will not share us with another.  Will a husband share his wife with another?  Neither will God tolerate any allegiance to competing authorities or competing loyalties.

  5. Judge/LawBreaker - visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; Exodus 20:5 - This means households where 3 and 4 generations are affected by the evil of the fathers who hate God.

  6. LawGiver Redeemer/Covenant Keeper - And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. Exodus 20:6 - The order of God makes for a blessed realm where His citizens love and obey Him and thus enjoy peace with each other.

As our relationship with YHWH, our loving father, is healed and whole we spread healing to every relationship in our lives. 

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 10/14 at 02:43 PM
New Covenant Patriarchy ... • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

The Nature of Authority and Manhood

Authority has a one-to-many structure as part of its nature.

If this natural structure is denied it, the authority withers and becomes impotent and twisted and will no longer provide its function or lend vitality to those in it.

Can you think of any authority anywhere in history that was not based on a one-to-many relationship? A sergeant has many corporals; a corporal has many privates; a captain has many officers; etc.  There may be many circumstances where an actual one-to-one relationship exists with only the potential for a one-to-many. However if this potentiality were ever denied then the authority aspect of the relationship would be made impotent.

This in fact is what we do see in monogamy only cultures.  The authority of the man in marriage is made impotent as he is denied this potential of being chief of many.

Augustine said it most eloquently: "For by a secret law of nature, things that stand chief love to be singular; but things that are subject are set under, not only one under one, but, if the system of nature or society allow, even several under one, not without becoming beauty. For neither hath one slave so several masters, in the way that several slaves have one master. Thus we read not that any of the holy women served two or more living husbands; but we read that many females served one husband, when the social state of the nation allowed it, and the purpose of the time persuaded it: for neither is it contrary to the nature of marriage. For several females can conceive from one man: but one female cannot from several men (such is the power of things principal) as many souls are rightly made subject to one God."

When authority is being stolen from the realm of the family by church and state, then we see the motive for the virulent opposition to the natural authority of the husband in his marriage.  This results in the weakening and destruction of many families causing untold societal ills, but this cost is gladly born by the usurpers in exchange for the ill-gotten authority gained.  Do not expect to see the restoration of that authority sanctioned by those who stole it.  When you understand this dynamic then you will also understand the attacks on polygynists of any kind where humanism is the reigning religion.

When those who say they believe in God's LawWord act on it, then God will restore Biblical marriage and husbands and wives will escape those who are destroying their marriages and families.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 05/16 at 06:48 AM
Commentary • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Sunday, March 18, 2007

New Covenant Patriarchy and Children

Children are the forgotten victims of the abandonment of YHWH's Law regarding marriage.  Being made in the image of God we long for a Father.  God our Father created us this way and thus gave children an earthly father to be a picture of their heavenly Father.  A father who does not abandon them, who models self-government, honor, honesty, truthfulness, giving of himself for his family, moral and religious leadership, courage and strength.  In other words, a man who cares for his family according to YHWH's LawWord, a fixed and unwavering, predictable standard of right and wrong, external to himself and to which he is accountable.  (A man our humanist culture is incapable of portraying.  At war with YHWH they are also at war with His image in man.)

Women who find themselves widowed or abandoned must not deny a father to their children just because the only good ones are already married.  Neither should they let the state or church convince them of the doctrine of demons (1 Timothy 4:1-3) that forbids marriage.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 03/18 at 01:37 PM
New Covenant Patriarchy ... • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, March 02, 2007

Men Ahead of Their Time

All of history has been predetermined by God and is working out his design, like a plant that is growing from a seed into its full flower and fruit.

Thus when we read Scripture we are seeing God's vision for that design, a world ordered according to his law as proclaimed, prophesied, and exemplified by the great patriarchs and prophets and apostles of Scripture, and fully embodied in the Messiah.

We are seeing, in them, the future, where men will deal with each other according to God's Law, reflecting His character toward one another and toward others and the world around them.  We must study these men and what they wrote in order to become like them, to respond like they did in similar circumstances.

Since all history is the unfolding of such a society, where all relationships are intermediated by God's LawWord, the men of God in Scripture were in fact living out the future, our future, in their time.  We must do the same in our time.  In fact, only that part of ourselves that has been conformed to God's character, as written in Scripture and exemplified by Christ, will survive into the new heavens and new earth.

So do not cheat yourself of future glory by letting yourself be misled as to the importance of making God's Law your study all the day.  Do not give credence to the idea that faith is somehow opposed to obedience.  Moses, the Law Giver, was, as Hebrews 11 says, a man of faith.  In fact it says this over and over again.

So we, by faith, must reflect God's character through obedience to His LawWord in its every detail, and beg God's forgiveness when we fall short, always upholding the holiness of His Law regardless of how lowly we hold ourselves in comparison.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 03/02 at 09:15 AM
Commentary • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Marcion's Heirs Tell It Like It Is

Yes, just before secular humanism takes the big swan dive into the dust bin of history it lays its epistemology bare and takes down those who are its strange bedfellows - modernist churches.

Marcion, you may recall, is the heretic who posited an evolving God. His original writings were all destroyed but his followers have the same mindset and are quit able to reproduce what he thought and taught.  Here is a quote from the modern Marcionites:

It seems to me that God is evolving right along with humanity. In the OT times he was brutal, he was a dictator. In NT times, he was forgiving and understanding to a point, but not yet ready to give up the LAW. Now, from what I am reading, christians (the spokesmen for God), are saying there is no hell, or that it is just a separation from God, rather than literal torment in a fire. Some christians also accept gays, most accept drinking, smoking, premarital sex, children out of wedlock, divorce, working on the sabbath, etc etc...
Is a kinder world leading us to a kinder God? God has mellowed with age? No longer need to stone or burn sinners?

The fact is God as portrayed in the bible does change. In the OT we have God announcing he is going to kill Moses for not getting his son circumcised. Yes, that's in your holy bible. Then in the NT we have all that stuff about turning the other cheek, gentle Jesus etc.

Correct me if I'm wrong but according to Christian dogma, Jesus is God. Well how come he wasn't a hard person in the NT as he (God) was in the OT? Was Jesus only pretending to be nice?

Right! that was my point in making this thread. After giving it some thought, it seemed obvious to me that our concept of God has evolved right along with mankind. Especially in light of recent discussions on this thread pertaining to hell, which now seems to be interpreted more as a separation from god than a literal burning in hell forever.(even by christians) Then when you consider that stoning people to death went out of vogue, as did punishing people for working on the sabbath etc etc - christianity has indeed changed over and over throughout the ages. And I predict it will continue too. I think those stuck in the dogma, in the letter of the law will be left behind while the more spiritually minded will continue to progress. At least I hope so!


These modern scoffers at the God of the Scriptures get all their ammunition from those Christians who refuse to take God at his Word.

So take your pick, do you want to side with the God of Scriptures and the ongoing validity of his LawWord or would you rather put your hope in the "Singularity"?  It just makes sense that those who believe in a sequence of millions of miracles, starting with nothing, that produced us and our universe would just take one more step and believe the equally ridiculous idea that we will soon be transformed into gods embedded in machines.

Yes, it is a hard choice to make but it will be forced upon you as an opportunistic Islam bears down on an anti-family Western Civilization compromised by secular humanism, the parasite religion that only has teeth for compromised humanist Christians.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 01/03 at 07:30 PM
Contending for the Faith • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, December 01, 2006

Judgment Day Scenarios

What will you get called up on the carpet for?

Okay, project yourself into the future when you are face to face with God on Judgment Day, where we have to give an account for every idle word, and thought, and action.

God is looking at you and your life is flashing before your eyes and he says either ...

a) "What were you thinking, taking my LawWord so seriously!  I did not mean that you should obey all my commandments as written.  After all, they were for the Old Testament times (thank you Marcion for making that distinction), the Hebrews, not for saved New Testament Christians!  Look how embarrassing you made my Scriptures to be in the eyes of decent folk with your talk of Biblical polygyny, reforming the calendar with Biblical holidays and Sabbaths and getting rid of perfectly functional weekday and month names.  Not to mention wearing tassels, not trimming your beard, abstaining from unclean food, condemning sodomites and so forth. Don't you know that only moral laws, as defined by a consensus of church leaders, are still valid? You are an intolerant person who has misrepresented Myself.  Go to hell!"


b) "What were you thinking, taking my LawWord so lightly? I gave you My commandments as written and Christ to reconcile you to them so you would obey them and reflect My Character thereby. Where the signs and seals of the covenant changed with the coming of my Son into the world, I made this manifestly clear. What made you think you could pick and choose those commands that met with your approval and disregard the rest while adding some of your own? I made you quite aware of some areas of your life and culture that needed to be changed to bring them into line with My LawWord and you weighed the cost of acting on that knowledge with the cost imposed by My enemies and chose to ignore Me.  You then refused to support those did take a stand.  You even taught others to disregard many of my laws. You will be the least in my Kingdom."

Which of these two do you suppose is more likely?  Should you take all of God's Laws very seriously and risk a) or should you blow off God's more embarrassing Laws and risk b)?

I cannot imagine a) ever coming to pass, although this is apparently what a lot of my fellow Christians think will happen to me, while something like b) is quite likely what most church leaders will face. 

What will you do as a teacher of your children?  Will you teach the ongoing validity of all of God's Law or will you take the easy way, the way of the prevailing culture you happen to be a part of?

This is what I want God to say to me:

c) "Well done, good and faithful servant.  You fell short of my Law but you were not at war with it.  You were imperfect in your understanding of many of My Laws but you loved them and did not teach others to disobey it.  When I made you aware of areas of your life that needed to change to be brought into conformity to My Law you counted the cost and chose to fear Me above man. When you started to worry about how you would make it you remembered to pray to Me and trusted Me to provide for you. You laughed at the scorn fools heaped upon you and counted yourself blessed to be counted worthy to suffer reproach for my Name's sake. You were never ashamed of me or My Law and neither am I ashamed of you.  Take your place of honor in My kingdom."

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 12/01 at 01:28 PM
Commentary • (0) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, June 19, 2006

God's Saints vs. God's Law - NOT!

Did Abraham, the Hebrew midwives, Rahab, Jael, David, and God Himself sin by deceiving those who were at odds with God’s will?

This is the implication of those who set the saints of of God against God's Law.  Always looking for a way to escape God's Law they hope to find refuge for their lawlessness in the example of the saints of Scripture.  Others maintain their own "purity of conscience" by calling these deceptions sins, which they themselves would never commit, despite the witness of Scripture that these very acts are held up in Scripture as acts of faith and examples to us of righteousness.

Abraham hid his marriage relationship with Sarah from those who would murder him to get her.

The Hebrew midwives deceived Pharaoh and saved the lives of the Hebrew male new-born babies.

Rahab told the officers of the state of Jericho that the spies had gone away while hiding them and assisting in their escape.

Jael lured Sisera inside for refreshment and a nap and then drove a tent peg through his temple while he slept.

David feigned madness in order to save his life from the hand of the Philistines.

God lured Pharaoh into wilderness near the Red Sea as he chased the Israelites so He could destroy him and his army.

R.J. Rushdoony has said that the source of a society's law is its God.  This is also true of individuals.  You operate by a certain law. You judge according to this law in the jurisdiction that you have been given.  Your mind, money, property, and time are all under your control and what you do with them is directed by the law you operate by.  The source of that law is your god.

All law is war against lawlessness.  Different systems of law thus represent different gods who are at war with one another. The God of Biblical Law is at war against all other gods and their law systems.  He is also a very jealous God.  When another god touches His Bride He gets especially incensed.  When you invite another god into your bosom He becomes livid (as in "a face white with rage").  Be careful whose law you make your own!

Now, we can have many different kinds of enemies.  We may have personal enemies. Others may hate us because we belong to a certain family.  I once was ill treated because I represented a company whose previous representatives were hated.  Being of a certain race, or wearing certain colors, speaking or not speaking with a particular accent may all make us enemies of complete strangers.  There are many real and imagined injustices that people feel need to be paid for and they may see you as having to bear that cost.  Some people play power politics and believe that it is to their advantage to foil or hurt you in some way.  Sin abounds and death follows after.  We are to treat such lawfully (Deut. 22) even when they treat us lawlessly, to seek their good even when they seek our harm. This pleases God and makes for peace.

Then there are those who take it upon themselves to be God's enemies.  They are at war with God, His Law order, and anything else that manifests His sovereignty. They don't just cheat and break the law, they justify and promote the legalization of lawlessness itself. They self-consciously work to undermine the very foundations of God's kingdom. They are professional rapists of the Bride of Christ.  Against all such God is always at war and so should we. 

We do not owe the truth to those who are at war with the truth. 

We do not owe forthrightness to those who have instituted lawlessness.  Yet some suggest that Abraham should have become an accessory to his own murder by revealing his marriage.  They impute sin to Abraham without any foundation in Scripture whatsoever.

We do not owe obedience or honesty to authorities who order evil, seeking to enlist us in Satan's service. Yet pietists suggest the midwives should have just not said anything. That God would have protected them and those baby boys somehow.  Thank God the midwives left us with such a wonderful example of Godly character, and not the weak-kneed, spineless, self-righteous morality of so many of their critics.

We do not owe loyalty to a regime or nation whose cup of iniquity overflows into judgment.  Yet some impute guilt to Rahab; they say she sinned by lying but that God overlooked it. But Scripture gives witness that God lifted her up from whoredom to the very genealogy of Christ. To be loyal to God you must be treasonous to His enemies. Choose whom you will serve.

We may pay death to those who are at war with life.  As did Jael.  What a great saint of God!  Worthy to be celebrated in song. She knew God's law and was easily able to distinguish between hospitality and accommodation of a weary fugitive, and righteous enticement and execution of an enemy of God's Kingdom. Yet some condemn her, thus showing their pretentiousness and ignorance.

Nobody shows modern day peitism for what it is like David does.  He offends modern pietists like no other saint of God, yet no one in Scripture is held in such high regard by God. It leaves His enemies seething inwardly as they look for ways to disparage David's reputation and standing before Christians. A great way to measure the caliber of a Bible teacher or pastor is to listen to what he has to say about David, and Abraham too.

Therefore, study God's Law at the feet of someone who can teach it properly, namely RJ Rushdoony.  There are some 1600 audio lessons to choose from and scores of books and articles. Then you will learn to discern, obey, and love God through both His Inscripturated Word and His Incarnate Word.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 06/19 at 08:33 AM
Scripture's Inconsistencies - NOT! • (0) CommentsPermalink

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Greater vs. Lesser Laws - NOT!

There is, apparently, no end to the ways rebellious man finds to justify breaking God’s Law while claiming to keep it.

So here is another.  It works like this: pit one law against another by creating a false conundrum.  Sometimes known by the fanciful name "Graded Absolutism," this doctrine purports to justify the breaking of one law by postulating a circumstance where a weightier law takes precedence.
This provides another "handy dandy bucket" that men immediately seize upon to then throw out any and all commandments they don't like, especially anything that would require a change of behavior.  I am here to kick this bucket over.
Now, what one must not ever do is to impugn God's providence or His Law, not even the least of His commands. 
That is God.  We are a different matter altogether.  We are deeply infested with sin.  We fall short of God's law without any effort at all.  This leads to all kinds of curses being applied to our lives.  Sinners are put between a hard place and a rock and then squeezed.  We often do not enjoy the blessings of obedience: health, long life, dominion, peace, and prosperity.
But we believers have been redeemed and so we have the principle of life in us through Christ's obedience. No longer outlaws, we strive to obey the law and learn it and teach it to our children.  We want to obey, we want the blessings of obedience, we want to please God first and not ourselves or other men. It is our new life.
I had a circumstance in my life where I listened to a sermon on the "Biblical Significance of the Beard" by John Weaver on and became convinced that I must keep the command of Leviticus not to mar the beard.  So I grew one. But I was economically dependent on a man who disproved of a beard, especially an untrimmed one.  My choice was between two bad choices.  I could risk my family’s income or shave the beard I had grown.
I shaved it off. 
But it grated on me that I could not keep this command without risking my family's income.  I did not have dominion and freedom in my source of income and therefore not in my freedom to wear a beard.  I was falling short and could not expect God's blessing for obedience in this.
Now, the brain is an amazing thing.  This circumstance of mine was an irritation to me and it bothered me.  So my brain sought a way of escape from this irritation. 
Accusing God's providence for failing me was out of the question.  Compromising God's Law and justifying my breaking it was out of the question. 
It took a year or more, but eventually I had the opportunity to perform some extraordinary service to this man - above and beyond.  He was very pleased with me at that point so I struck while the iron was hot and asked him for the small favor of letting me wear the beard.  He agreed.
I had to work very hard for the privilege of obedience.  Now I am able to please God and receive His blessings for obedience to this command, whatever they may be.  In this I did no violence to the law of God by saying, "God put me in this circumstance so I am free to disobey."  This is the sin Adam committed when he indirectly accused God saying, "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat."
I have many other circumstances like this in my life.  They all irritate me.  My brain is continually seeking a way to obey.  With all my heart I am seeking God's kingdom, when and where I am fully able to obey all God's laws and commands and no longer have to choose between one cursed disobedience or another. Until then we must not make peace with sin, not even disobedience to the least of His commandments.
Let us understand that we are justified by Christ's sacrifice on the cross, not by accusing God for our circumstances or by pitting one law against another.
Posted by Wayne McGregor on 06/08 at 11:06 AM
Scripture's Inconsistencies - NOT! • (0) CommentsPermalink

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

The Summary of the Law vs. the Specifics of the Law - NOT!

The battle of the definition of Christ is underway again.  Is Christ the incarnation of the Mosaic Law or is He a statist humanist (Whom we define as we go along)?

There are those who, in a vain attempt to justify studied ignorance of God's Law, pit the summary of God's Law against the nitty gritty details and specifics of God's Law. This goes along with a general rejection of the, so called, "Old Testament" as irrelevant and with a general feeling that the specifics of the law are what the Pharisees and hypocrites believed in and were condemned for. They, on the other hand, are more concerned with the weightier matters of the law (caring for widows and orphans, and loving your neighbor as yourself) and not the trivial details (like, say, exactly who should be doing this and how).

This of course, leaves them free to fill in the details with man-made rules and regulations while still feeling quite Christian.  In fact it was not long ago that a socialist / humanist from the far left made the point on C-SPAN that the state (in this case Washington DC) was fulfilling the Christian mandate to love your neighbor as yourself and justified more social spending and higher taxes to that end.  Without the details of the law of God, his evangelical opponent had nothing authoritative to offer in rebuttal.

Over time, Christians will find themselves squeezed between an acceptance of humanism and an acceptance of the ongoing validity of the details and specifics of Biblical Law.  They have internalized a great deal of humanist presuppositions which control the way they vote, how they educate their children, who they look to for health care, and economic blessings, how they arrange marriages, etc.. Yet they profess Christ, the walking incarnation of whole-hearted obedience to every regulation and specific requirement of the Mosaic law, who came to reconcile us to the Mosaic law and bore for us the condemnation of the law that put us at enmity with God.  The question is, which side of their split personalities will win out.  They must either change their values or redefine Christ in the image of a statist humanist.  It is the definition of Christ in the specifics of the Law of God that stands in the way of the humanist redefinition of Christ.

To make the case clearly now:

  1. The Mosaic Law is the perfect written reflection of the character of God.
  2. The Messiah is the perfect incarnate reflection of the character of God.
  3. Love is putting the Mosaic Law into force as the Messiah did.

God revealed his character in the written Mosaic Law in all its details and specific requirements.  He defined love as putting that Law into action. He put the Law into living form in Christ Who was therefore the incarnation of the Law and therefore became love.  We are also to incarnate that Law, putting it into action and thus demonstrating love to our neighbor and thus reflecting God's character in our relationship with others.

For more on the specifics of God's Law and how it differs from humanism see the books by R.J. Rushdoony at: and

For deprogramming from humanism and learning to see Scriptures as a whole unity, see:



Posted by Wayne McGregor on 05/17 at 01:30 PM
Scripture's Inconsistencies - NOT! • (0) CommentsPermalink

Monday, March 27, 2006

Moses vs. Jesus vs. Paul - NOT!

The ongoing validity of all of Gods Law is here defended. This is also a call for the end of Christian doublemindedness with regard to the Law of God. 

Tom Shipley has taught me the importance of the unity and harmony of Scripture. God cannot contradict himself. If He appears to do so, then it is we who are hazy and lazy of mind and full of contradictions and maledictions, not God.  God goes to great lengths to establish the goodness and blessedness of His Law with the command for us to study it, to make it the context in which we live our lives, to make it our mental environment.  Why?  Because it is a true reflection of the character of God.  In fact Jesus Christ is the incarnation of the LawWord of God, which God says is even greater than His name.

First: who is this article addressed to? It is addressed to Christian leaders and teachers everywhere. Beware! You are held to a higher standard by God and your standing in heaven is at risk; to wit:

Therefore, whoever relaxes one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever does and teaches them, this one shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven. (Mat 5:19)

Now, to our present evangelical, antinomian (anti-Mosaic law) mindset, some of what Paul or the other Apostles wrote appears to contradict or do away with God's Law.  This just proves how ignorant we are of the Scriptures, the context of the verses, who they were written to, and the errors they addressed.  Now, if you, as a teacher and preacher find yourself confused by these passages, do yourself a favor and just read them without adding any kind of commentary that would teach your hearers to break even the least of God's Laws.

Let us look at an example of false teaching that has caused many a preacher and teacher to be relegated by God to the lowest position in the Kingdom of Heaven.  It is based on a misreading of Colossians 2:16ff:

Col 2:16ff  Then do not let anyone judge you in eating, or in drinking, or in part of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths, which are a shadow of coming things (LITV)

This is commonly used to teach that Paul is here throwing out all the dietary laws, the Biblical calendar, and sometimes the whole of the Mosaic law till all that is left is "Love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself."  Often a handy trash can is created, labeled "Ceremonial Laws", "Jewish Culture", or "Laws of Separation", into which you are encouraged to throw all the laws you don't like, or that are in conflict with our current and local man-made laws and traditions.

Now, God is not doubleminded as we are, that He would inspire the Apostle Paul to contradict Christ or Moses, and make himself least in the Kingdom of heaven himself by teaching the disregard of whole categories of God's Holy Law.  To suppose such a thing is to impune the character of God, and to teach it is to perpetrate great harm upon the saints in your charge and to retard your work in the Kingdom of God.  Better you should play a tape by a true teacher of God's LawWord than to reveal your presumptuous ignorance.  Always assume the ongoing validity of all of God's Laws.

Reading it in context, understanding that he is addressing the Gnostic heresey, that 'matter is evil and unimportant while spirit is good and important,'  Paul is saying, in effect:

"As you enjoy the food and drink that God blesses you with, do not let anyone guilt manipulate you because you are enjoying the eating and drinking of it, or because you are taking part in the feasts and holidays and Sabbaths appointed in the Biblical calendar, which are shadow picture previews of the reality to come."

So it is with all such passages.  Rather than contradict the Law they establish it as the written revelation of the character of Christ.  Do we always interpret and translate correctly?  No, but we should make sure we do no violence to the integrity and harmony of Scripture, and never teach the relaxation of the least of God's laws, much less dismiss whole categories of them.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 03/27 at 10:45 AM
Scripture's Inconsistencies - NOT! • (0) CommentsPermalink

Sunday, January 29, 2006

New Covenant Patriarchal Creed

1. I believe that Jesus Christ is the incarnation of the Law of God, the walking Torah of YHWH, and the source of all definition, purpose, and meaning and that the Law of God is the Character of God writ large in the Scriptures for our benefit.

2. I believe that the Law of God as contained in the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels and the Epistles, that is the Holy Bible, is eternal and unchanging and always fully in force, witnessed to us by the Holy Spirit, and is the ultimate source of all authority.

3. I believe that Jesus Christ came to save us from the condemnation of the Law and to reconcile us to the Law as our way of sanctification and as the mediator between man and man, man and creation, and man and all aspects of life.

4. I believe that the Law of God in every particular reflects and defines the character of Jesus Christ and that we cannot know who He is outside of the Law.

5. I believe that Jesus Christ is the embodiment of the Love of God and that Love is the Law of God put into action, transforming it from a dead letter to a living force that reflects God's Will.

6. I believe that Jesus Christ will come again when the entire world is brought into obedience to His Law.

7. I believe that no institution can have any legitimacy except that it is  founded on the authority of God's Law and maintains itself in conformity to it.

8. I believe that the LawWord of God is whole and self-consistent and that any statements within it that appear to conflict are human errors in translation or hermeneutics.

9. I believe that, like Jesus Christ, I too am to be the walking embodiment of God's Law and so will endeavor to learn it, love it, and live it and teach it to others.

10. I believe that the Law of God is a gift from God to those who are reconciled to Him through Jesus Christ and that it is the key to the promises and blessings of Scripture, a sign of His grace to us, and that obedience to it is a privilege.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 01/29 at 05:08 PM
New Covenant Patriarchy ... • (0) CommentsPermalink

Friday, December 09, 2005

Socialism and Bad Theology vs Women and Children

It is becoming clear that much of the world’s misery and poverty are directly associated with the misguided war on the family.  This takes place first of all within modern Christian society doing the exact opposite of what God requires of those who would practice pure religion.

It goes like this: a man with a legal wife and children finds another woman and builds a relationship with her. Nothing new here, it is simply nature taking its course. But society, in the form of churches, governments, and other institutions, refuses to recognize or condone this relationship. The man is ostracized if he is open about his 2nd wife and the children he has by her. He is not allowed in church and civil law is against him. He wants to maintain the relationship but he is forced to do so furtively and, under enough pressure, may reduce time spent with the 2nd wife and their children, or abandon them altogether.

The 2nd wife and her children become objects of pity for well meaning do-gooders, who have the same attitudes that hurt or destroyed her relationship to the man in her life. She is now dependent on handouts and welfare. She may be able to hang on to her children but in many cases she is too destitute to do so. She is left bereaved and childless.  She is a victim of the war on the family by the forces of socialism and its misguided Christian allies.

You can see her and her children in late night commercials where a do-gooder will ask you to help feed and house them.

Why not just let her have her husband and the children have their father and stop the war on the family?!

The same goes for the woman who finds herself widowed and her children fatherless.

"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."  James 1:27

For a church to support a widow she must be 60 years old.  Yet we are still required to look after her and her fatherless children.  This is best done by letting a man, even if he is already married, give himself to her as a husband and to her children as a father.  We believers must keep ourselves from being polluted by the world's perversion of marriage and practice pure and faultless religion.

Posted by Wayne McGregor on 12/09 at 04:36 PM
Commentary • (0) CommentsPermalink
Page 3 of 6 pages « First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »