Author: prd

See pages 119 (starting at PDF page 13) thru 121 pulled from Rev. Matthew Miller’s Masters thesis here.

Download the link to the July 2015 interview on the sin of ‘Mama Bears’ with Rev. Det Bowers of Columbia, S.C., on the Tara Show (106.3 Word) in Greenville, S.C., at this QR Code. Two files to download.

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q.124. Who are the father and mother in the fifth commandment?
A.  By father and mother, in the fifth commandment, are meant, not only natural parents, but all superiors in age and gifts; and especially such as, by God’s ordinance, are over us in place of authority, whether in family, church, or commonwealth. P.T.   Pr 23:22, 25; Eph 6:1,2; 1Ti. 5:1,2;Ge 4:20-22; 45:8; 2Ki. 5:13; 2:12;13:14; Ga 4:19; Isa 49:23.

Q.126. What is the general scope of the fifth commandment?
A.  The general scope of the fifth commandment is, the performance of those duties which we mutually owe in our several relations, as inferiors, superiors, or equals. P.T.  Eph 5:21; 1Pe. 2:17; Ro 12:10.

Q.130. What are the sins of superiors?
A. The sins of superiors are, besides the neglect of the duties required of them,[a] an inordinate seeking of themselves,[b] their own glory,[c] ease, profit, or pleasure;[d] commanding things unlawful,[e] or not in the inferiors to perform;[f] counselling,[g] encouraging,[h] or favouring them in that which is evil;[i] [j] dissuading, discouraging, or discountenancing them in that which is good;[k] correcting them unduly;[l] careless exposing, or leaving them to wrong, temptation, and danger;[m] provoking them to wrath;[n] or any way dishonoring themselves, or lessening their authority, by an unjust, indiscreet, rigorous, or remiss behaviour.[o] 

Footnotes: Proof Text Below
a] Eze. 34:2-4,  Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that whihc was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.
[b] Phil. 2:21  For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s
[c] John 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? 7:18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
[d] Isa 46:10-11 His watchman are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, that cannot bark, sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber. Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, everyone for his gain, from his quarter. Dt 17:17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
[e] Dan 3:4-6 Then an herald cried aloud, To you it is commanded, O people, nations, and languages, That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up: And whoso falleth not down and worshippeth shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace.  Acts 4:17, 18 But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name. And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
[f] Ex. 5:10-18;  And the taskmasters of the people went out, and their officers, and they spake to the people, saying, Thus saith Pharaoh, I will not give you straw. Go ye, get you straw where ye can find it: yet not ought of your work shall be diminished. So the people were scattered abroad throughout all the land of Egypt to gather stubble instead of straw. And the taskmasters hasted them, saying, Fulfil your works, your daily tasks, as when there was straw. And the officers of the children of Israel, which Pharaoh’s taskmasters had set over them, were beaten, and demanded, Wherefore have ye not fulfilled your task in making brick both yesterday and to day, as heretofore? Then the officers of the children of Israel came and cried unto Pharaoh, saying, Wherefore dealest thou thus with thy servants? There is no straw given unto thy servants, and they say to us, Make brick: and, behold, thy servants are beaten; but the fault is in thine own people. But he said, Ye are idle, ye are idle: therefore ye say, Let us go and do sacrifice to the Lord. Go therefore now, and work; for there shall no straw be given you, yet shall ye deliver the tale of bricks  Mt 23:2, 4  Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:,…For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
[g] Mt 14:8 And she, being before instructed of her mother, said, Give me here John Baptist’s head in a charger.  Mk 6:24 And she went forth, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the Baptist.
[h] 2 Sam.13:28 Now Absalom had commanded his servants, saying, Mark ye now when Amnon’s heart is merry with wine, and when I say unto you, Smite Amnon; then kill him, fear not: have not I commanded you? be courageous, and be valiant.
[i] 1 Sam. 3:13 For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile, and he restrained them not.
[j]  N/A
[k] John 7:46-49 The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.  Col. 3:21 Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged. Ex. 5:17 But he said, Ye are idle, ye are idle: therefore ye say, Let us go and do sacrifice to the Lord.
[l] 1Pet. 2:18-20   Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. Heb 12:10  For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Dt 25:3 Forty stripes he may give him, and not exceed: lest, if he should exceed, and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee.
[m] Ge 38:11, 26 Then said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father’s house, till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren did. And Tamar went and dwelt in her father’s house….And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She hath been more righteous than I; because that I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more. Ac 18:17 Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. And Gallio cared for none of those things.
[n] Eph 6:4   And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
[o] Gen. 9:21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. I Ki 12:13-16 And the king answered the people roughly, and forsook the old men’s counsel that they gave him;And spake to them after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke: my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. Wherefore the king hearkened not unto the people; for the cause was from the Lord, that he might perform his saying, which the Lord spake by Ahijah the Shilonite unto Jeroboam the son of Nebat. So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David. So Israel departed unto their tents. 1 Kings 1:6 And his father had not displeased him at any time in saying, Why hast thou done so? and he also was a very goodly man; and his mother bare him after Absalom. 1 Sam. 2:29-31 Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation; and honourest thy sons above me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people? herefore the Lord God of Israel saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed. Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house.

By Paul Dorr 2010

What is Eisegesis? It is the hermeneutical principle (opposite of exegesis) describing the practice of forcing a pre-conceived bias (in Farris’ case, a profitable one at that) on one’s exposition of the Word of God. 

In a letter dated Dec. 12, 1997, to an unnamed home-school mother, Michael Farris, founder of Home School Legal Defense Association, established his belief as to why the government has the Biblical right to punish a parent who does not teach their child to read.  An excerpt from that letter follows.   It reveals his fundamental Biblical error, which, when believed by tens of thousands of home-school families, helps provide the fuel to his profitable enterprises.

He writes,

“I believe that God commands parents to teach their children. Deut. 6:7; Eph. 6:4. God does not command or authorize the government to teach children. God does not command or authorize the church to teach children (although Scripture does command the church to teach young men and women). I do not feel that I can interpret this scriptural pattern for others. But for me and my house, I believe that the Bible requires my wife and I to teach our children ourselves. (When they are young men and women we believe the church can play a substantial role and this is why our oldest daughter attends a Christian college).

“I also believe that God commands the government to punish those who do evil. I Peter 2:14. I believe that this includes the power of government to punish parents who do evil to their children. If a parent rapes a child, beats a child with chains, intentionally breaks a child’s arm, or intentionally starves a child the government has the responsibility to punish such evil doing. Likewise, if a parent denies their child food, clothing, basic shelter, or education I believe the government can punish such a parent because God requires the parent to furnish all these things to their child.

“Stated simply, if a parent has a child who has the basic intelligence to be capable of reading the Bible, and that parent deliberately fails to teach that child to read (by the time the child is twelve years old, for example) the government has the authority to punish such a parent because the parent has done an evil thing as defined by God. “But if anyone provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” I Timothy 5:8.

Here’s where Farris’s train flies off the tracks –

“Likewise, if a parent denies their child food, clothing, basic shelter, or education I believe the government can punish such a parent because God requires the parent to furnish all these things to their child.”

He doesn’t seem to understand the routine Biblical premise that there are many things the Bible declares to be evil, which still don’t rise to the Biblical requirement of civil sanctions.  How about the husband not loving the wife as Christ loved the church – and goes out every night with ‘the boys’.   Evil?  Yes.  Should the civil magistrate punish him and throw him in jail?  No, as there is no such Biblical warrant! How about the man who made a private, but false statement about a fellow Christian in church and refused to repent, when asked to?  Evil? Yes.  Civil punishment? No! Pages of such examples could be written regarding such evils, where the role of the civil authorities in 1 Peter 2:14 does not apply.

A father who deliberately starves his child to death receives the punishment of the civil authorities – yes!  He broke the 6^th commandment (Thou shall do no murder) and God commands it be punished by the civil magistrate. (Ex. 21:12,13, Num. 35:16-17, 18-33, Gen. 9:6).

The Bible has many clear teachings on the nature of sins that rise to civil crimes – those blaspheming God, violating covenants and contracts, against the person’s body, property, public slander, perjury in public testimony, etc.  But spiritual harm done through willful neglect to teach children to read – so that they may read and understand the Law-word of God – evil as such is, is not a civil crime.  If willful, it may rise to pastoral and church discipline.  Even then, what if a family in financial crisis (maybe part of an entire economic depression) willfully chooses not to pay to educate their children so that they can afford to purchase food and medicine for them?  When civil laws are to be uniformly applied (Deut. 10:17-19, 24:14-15), should the government yet “punish these parents” too?  Should the church even discipline them?  Clearly not!

Farris defends his conclusions by wresting 1 Timothy 5:8 far out of its context.  He applies his eisegesis.  Read from verse 1 through 16 of chapter five. Context is critical in this passage as it is an application of the 5^th and 8^th commandments – honoring thy father and thy mother and not stealing from the church.  It pertains mostly to the elderly.  This text is making the distinction between the widows who “trust in God” (v. 5) and yet have, as Matthew Henry’s Commentary says, no family to provide for them as the 84 yr. old widow Anna lacked, in Luke 2:36-38.  Those are to be taken in by the church (Luke 2: 37).  The 1Timothy 5 text also makes the distinction between the Godly widows and the ungodly – she that liveth in pleasure (v. 6).  Again, the Godly widow who have no family are to be cared for by the church, like Anna was.

But the family of such Godly widows, who have means and who yet do not provide for “his own” (v. 8), thus forcing their mothers to become the burden of the church, as v.16 condemns, are those who have denied the faith. Such Christians are, in affect, attacking the church’s diaconal work. Even then, Paul does not call on the State to punish those Christians who are so burdening the church. His response is limited to declaring their spiritual state in verse 8.

A categorical condemnation of a Christian father who does not teach his child to read, and as a result call for the civil authorities to punish him – can not be wrested from 1 Tim. 5:8. Rather Farris reads it into this text. Why?

Not sure, but my guess is that this provides a great guilt/fear manipulation to convince Christian home-school parents that they must submit to the most egregious aspect of the 19^th century Prussian egalitarian, democratic experiment of civil religion, known as ‘government education’ – that is, their “compulsory attendance” laws.  The original premise of such laws was to insure that the student learn how to read, by being in school.   America’s mass illiteracy should well demonstrate that this notion was false.

Yes, Farris says in the letter to this home-school Mom that he does not approve of compulsory attendance laws.   What he fails to inform this mother and those of us in Iowa, is that the vehi-cle to punish home-school parents who are not teaching their children – Iowa code 299A refers in the first paragraph (A.1), to the parents of “…a child of compulsory education age” as the ones held accountable by the civil authorities.  These are the laws that Michael Farris believes the state has a right to enforce against Christian home-school families and they are founded on the compulsory attendance law.  I can’t imagine it being different in any other state.

According to Ellwood P. Cubberley’s celebrated history Public Education in the United States (1919, revised 1934), “The history of compulsory attendance legislation in the states has been much the same everywhere, and everywhere laws have been enacted only after overcoming strenuous opposition.”  This is cited in Underground History of American Education, p. 101, by John Taylor Gatto.

The advent of the resultant “truancy” laws, which our Christian forefathers strenuously objected to, have contributed mightily to mass consumerism, untold debts, systemic rebellion to parents, adolescent adulthood, a sexually perverse society, broad illiteracy and worst of all – the near categorical loss of the true Christian faith.  Meanwhile, were the objections of our ancestors, who likely shared such Scriptural understanding, wrong?  One had best be careful asking this, out of fear that Michael Farris will boldly declare, “Yes, they were!”  After all, one of his former professors insists he heard Farris say in class once that St. Augustine is in hell.  If he can condemn St. Augustine, falsely judging our Christian ancestors who strongly objected to the government asserting authority into the training of their children should be a piece of cake.

Once home-school parents believe the false notion that the Bible grants the civil magistrate the authority to punish them for not educating their children, are they not easy pickings to be one of the 80,000+ who send Farris their $105 each year to ‘secure’ legal protection from the government? Again, I am not dismissing the sin where Christian parents of means willfully fail to educate their children, while knowing that education entails far more than teaching them how to read.  It is the civil magistrate’s trumped up authority, via’ Michael Farris, that is doing us so much harm.

Farris concluded his letter to this home-school Mom, “In summary, if you believe that it is necessary for HSLDA to argue that government can never punish those who do absolutely nothing for their children’s education, we are not the organization for you.”

Oh that it could be that simple. The problem is that Farris’ eisegesis does not conform to the Word of God.  Those Christians, who by faith in Jesus Christ want families truly free under God’s Law, should understand that HSLDA is not the organization for the cause of home-schooling.  We need to challenge this very public homeschool leader to stop his immensely profitable guilt manipulation and fear-mongering. 

His track record has been to ridicule and sometimes lie about (as he did regarding Constitutional law professor Dr. Charles Rice) those who challenge him. Let such a response only inspire you to challenge him even further.  Our ranks will grow as we strive to be faithful to God’s Word, and to the original Constitution.

Christos Kurios,
Paul Dorr
Rescue the Perishing · P.O. Box 115 · Ocheyedan, IA 51354 
Ph 712-758-3660 | Fx 712-758-3475 | e-mail rtp@iowatelecom.net

“Blessed is the man whom You instruct, O Lord, and teach out of Your law,…For the Lord will not cast off His people, Nor will He forsake His inheritance. But judgment will return to righteousness, And all the upright in heart will follow it. Who will rise up for me against the evildoers? Who will stand up for me against the workers of iniquity? Unless the Lord had been my help, My soul would soon have settled in silence.” Psalm 94:12,14-17

e

Should Women Hold Public Office?

Written By Pastor William Einwechter, Original Print Date Likely in the 1990s.
William O. Einwechter is a teaching elder at Immanuel Free Reformed Church. He is a graduate of Washington Bible College (B.A.) and Capital Bible Seminary (Th.M.) and was ordained to the Gospel Ministry in 1982. He is the vice president of the National Reform Association and editor of the periodical “The Christian Statesman.” He is the author of “Ethics and God’s Law” and “English Bible Translations: By What Standard?” and editor of the book “Explicitly Christian Politics.” His writings have appeared in “The Christian Statesman,” “Chalcedon Report,” and “Patriarch.” He and his wife Linda are the parents of 10 children.

With more and more women entering the political sphere and running for political office, the conscientious, biblically oriented Christian is confronted with the question of whether or not he should give his support and vote for a woman. This question becomes more pressing for many when the “best candidate,” i.e., the most conservative, pro-life candidate in a particular race is a woman.

A number of years ago, we in Pennsylvania were confronted with this issue when an articulate, pro-life, politically conservative woman (who was also a wife and mother) ran for governor of our state. Many Christians enthusiastically supported her. But not all of us were confident that this was the right or consistent thing to do. The following essay grew out of the concern over her candidacy, and seeks to address the larger questions of the acceptability of women magistrates and the Christian’s responsibility before God in regard to supporting a woman for political office.

In approaching this matter, we need to first understand that these questions can only be answered from Scripture. Mere human opinion or reason is not sufficient for the Christian. The Word of God is the only infallible, authoritative standard for directing us into the paths of righteousness. Only the Bible has the power to equip us for every good work (2 Tim. 3:15-17). The duty of every true follower of Jesus Christ is to obey His commandments (John 14:15), and, in fact, the sign that we are really His disciples is that we continue in obedience to His Word (John 8:31; 1 John 2:3-5). So then, if we are to be faithful to Christ, we must search the Scriptures to see what the Lord says in regards to the issue of women civil rulers, and whether it is permissible for Christians to support a woman for the office of civil magistrate.

Second, we should recognize that the issue here is not the character or ability of the woman seeking the office; nor is it her spiritual condition, her views on the issues, or even if she is the “best” available candidate. The point in question is this: does the Word of God give us the liberty to place a woman into a political office where she will in some sense bear rule over us in the civil sphere? Or, to state it more precisely: is it biblically proper for a woman to hold political office, and thus rule over men? Has God ordained women to be civil leaders, or has He reserved this authority for men only?

I believe that the Bible gives a definitive answer to this question: women are not permitted by God to hold political office and rule over men in the political sphere. There are four lines of evidence in the Bible that establish that women are not to hold political office. I will first set forth the biblical evidence that prohibits a woman from bearing rule, and, then, I will deal with the example of Deborah that is often cited as proof that it is permissible for a woman to hold public office.

1. The Biblical Doctrine of the Headship of Man Disqualifies a Woman for Civil Office.

The scriptural revelation of the creation of man and woman, and the scriptural commentary on their creation establishes the headship of the man over the woman. The text of Genesis 2:7 and 2:18-24 teaches us that man was made first, and then the woman was made to be man’s helper and companion. The Bible instructs us that this order of creation was by God’s design, and that it establishes the positional priority of the man over the woman in regards to authority and leadership. In setting forth the authority of the man over the woman in the context of the local church, Paul appeals to the creation order saying, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Tim. 2:13).

In another passage, Paul states the divinely ordained order of authority and headship: “But I would have you to know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3). Therefore, the Apostle Paul teaches that God has decreed that the order of authority be as follows: God-Christ-Man-Woman. Each one in this “chain of command” is under the headship (i.e., authority) of the one preceding him or her. Later on in this same text, Paul, as in 1 Timothy 2, calls upon the order of creation to show man’s headship over the woman.

He says, “For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man” (1 Cor. 11:8-9). The Bible explicitly states that the man has headship over the woman, and that this headship is not based on cultural factors, or even the fall; rather, it is based on the created order established by God Himself.

Now it is also plain in the Bible that God has ordained that the order of the headship of man must be maintained in each governing institution set up by God. There are three primary institutions established by the Lord for the ordering of human affairs. These are the family, the church, and the state. Each of these institutions has authority to govern within its appointed sphere.

We could say, then, that there are three “governments” in the world: family government, church government, and state government. In each of these governments, God has commanded that men bear rule. The man has headship in the family (Eph. 5:22-24), the church (1 Tim. 2:11-14; 1 Cor. 14:34-35), and also by implication and command, in the state as well (1 Cor. 11:3; Ex. 18:21; see point 2 below).

Could it be that the man has headship only in the family and the church but not in the state? No, this could not be, lest you make God the author of confusion, and have Him violate in the state the very order He established at creation and has revealed in Holy Scripture! If one is going to argue for the acceptability of women bearing rule in the civil sphere, then to be consistent, he or she also needs to argue for the acceptability of women bearing rule in the family and the church.

Now it is true that some attempt to do just that; but their denial of male headship for the family, church, and state is really a rejection of the Word of God and is a repudiation of God’s created order. And it is not sufficient to contend that it is acceptable to support a woman for civil ruler when she is the best candidate, unless you are also prepared to argue that it is acceptable to advocate a woman for the office of elder because she is better suited than the available men in the church; and unless you are also prepared to say that the wife should rule over her husband if she is better equipped to lead than her husband is.

2. The Biblical Qualifications for Civil Office Require Civil Leaders to Be Men.

Every time the Scripture speaks to the subject of the necessary qualifications for those who will bear rule in the civil sphere, it always speaks in terms of men and never in terms of women. This is significant, and based on point number 1 above, it is not hard to understand. The consistent assumption of Scripture is that men are to be the civil magistrates; and, as we have seen, this is not based on culture but upon the created order.

Since God is both Creator and Lawgiver there is never any contradiction between the created order and the law of God. And as creation establishes the headship of man in the civil sphere by means of man being created first and the woman being created for man, so the law of God sets the headship of man in the civil sphere by means of the stated qualifications for civil rulers.

God set forth the essential qualifications for civil magistrates for all people and for all time when He spoke through Jethro to Moses: “Moreover, thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers…” (Ex. 18:21; emphasis added). And Moses himself said to the people as they were about to choose their civil magistrates, “Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you” (Deut. 1:13; emphasis added). Importantly, the word for “men” chosen by the Holy Spirit in both of these texts is the Hebrew, gender specific word for a man, i.e., a male as opposed to a female.

Furthermore, the directions that God gives concerning the establishment of a king in Israel requires that a man, and not a woman, be chosen (Deut. 17:14-20). The king was to be a “brother,” and he was not to “multiply wives to himself.” Clearly, a man is in view here. The law of God commands us, therefore, to choose men to be our rulers! Likewise, in every other passage of Scripture dealing with the civil magistrate and his qualifications and duties, men are in view (2 Sam. 23:3; Neh. 7:2; Prov. 16:10; 20:8, 28; 29:14; 31:4-5; Rom. 13:1-6; etc.).

Therefore, the standard of God’s law that men be our civil rulers upholds the order of creation. God has spoken to us in His Word, and there He commands us to set men, not women, into positions of civil authority. To consider these texts (Ex. 18:21; Deut. 1:13; 17:14-20) irrelevant in regards to what they say about setting men in civil office, would logically require us to consider the other qualifications listed as being of no account as well. The rejection of these Scriptures would leave us with no biblical standard for citizens in choosing their rulers. This may suit some, but for those who are the disciples of Jesus Christ and love the law of God, such a position is abhorrent.

3. The Biblical Picture of a Virtuous Woman Is Against a Woman Holding Civil Office.

In Proverbs 31:10-31, we are given the biblical picture of a woman who fears God and walks in His ways. The passage begins with a question: “Who can find a virtuous woman?” The question implies that such a woman is rare and precious, just like rubies. The description of the virtuous woman shows her to be an industrious, loving woman who devotes herself to the well-being of her husband and children. The center of her interest and the place of her ministry are in her home. God has called her to be “a keeper at home” (Titus 2:5), and she willingly and joyfully fulfills her calling to the great blessing of all who depend on her piety, wisdom, and homemaking skills.

Of great importance to the issue before us in this essay, are these words concerning her husband: “Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land” (Prov. 31:23). The “gates” in Old Testament times referred to the place where the leaders of the city (i.e., “the elders of the land”) would gather to discuss community affairs, administer civil law, and judge in criminal and civil cases. The “gates,” therefore, is a reference to the “city hall,” the “capital building,” the “courthouse” or, in short, to the seat of civil government.

The key for us is to note that, in the case of the virtuous woman, it is her husband who is active in the gates; the virtuous woman is not herself seated in the gates — she is active in her home. This should not surprise us, for the order of creation and the law of God establish the fact that men are to bear rule in civil government. The virtuous woman understands this, and takes the vital place that God has assigned her in the home and with her family; she does not try to intrude herself into a seat in the gates.

However, we need to note that the virtuous woman’s works are to praised in the gates (Prov. 31:31). Her works are not in the gates, but they are to be praised in the gates; that is, those who are leaders in the community ought to recognize the great work that she is doing in support of the community by faithfully fulfilling her duties as a wife and mother (1 Tim. 2:15; 5:10, 14; Titus 2:3-5). This is her glorious work for the Lord and His kingdom. It is of the utmost importance!

Furthermore, it should be recognized that the virtuous woman does make her presence felt in community concerns. But it is through the influence that she has on her husband (and mature sons) that her wisdom and knowledge will help to direct the affairs of the community. Yes, it is her husband who sits in the gates, but his renown and ability as a civil leader is due, at least in part (if not largely), to her help and support. Yes, it is the husband who speaks and judges in the gates, but it is his wise and godly wife who is his chief counselor.

Let no one speak lightly or disparagingly of the woman’s appointed role and her service to Christ and His kingdom! And let no woman set aside the example of the virtuous woman and seek to sit in the gates with the rulers of the land. And let no Christian have any part in putting her there.

4. The Biblical Lament that “Women Rule over Them” Confirms the Error of a Woman Holding Civil Office.

In Isaiah 3:12, the prophet, as the representative of the Lord, laments the condition of the covenant nation saying: “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them…” There is some debate as to the precise meaning of this verse. Some would contend that actual children and women were ruling, while others hold that this verse is teaching that those who were in authority were completely unqualified for such a position — as unqualified as women and children.

Whatever the exact connotations of this text are, one thing is clear: women ruling over men in the civil sphere is put in a very unfavorable light. The fact that Israel had women reigning over them is seen to be the result of sin and a part of God’s retributive justice; it is certainly not considered a blessing in this text! I believe that the most likely interpretation is that Israel had weak and incompetent leaders (cf. Isa. 3:4; Ecc. 10:16) who are being controlled by women.

Now if it is a sign of weakness for men who are civil rulers to be ruled by women, what is it but a sign of feebleness on the part of men to actually seek to have women rule over them? It is weakness and a sin because it is an abdication of their responsibility to be the leaders God has called them to be. No people ought to rejoice in women rulers for it is a sign of confusion and judgment. It is a sign that men have utterly failed to exercise the leadership required of them.

5. The Biblical Account of Deborah Does Not Imply that Women Should Hold Civil Office.

Those who believe that it is biblically permissible for women to hold civil office look to the account of Deborah (Judg. 4:1-5:31) for their main support. They must hope for support of their view in this account because there is no explicit teaching anywhere in the Bible that establishes the position that women should bear rule in the civil sphere. But does the account of Deborah in the book of Judges support their view? I believe that it does not, and I will seek to show that the example of Deborah is not of sufficient weight to overthrow the four-fold cord of evidence that has been weaved above.

First, in regard to the account of Deborah, recognize that it would be unwise to cancel out the explicit biblical teaching on the headship of man, the clear statements of the law, the picture of the virtuous woman, and the lament over women ruling on the basis of what took place in Israel in one of the most confused periods in Israel’s history. We should remember the important admonition of the Westminster Confession of Faith: “The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.”

We contend that the biblical teaching presented above speaks far more clearly to the issue of women magistrates than does the account of Deborah. It is a serious mistake of hermeneutics to use the story of Deborah to overthrow the positive precepts and principles of other Scriptures, and to establish it as the standard biblical text for determining the propriety of women rulers.

Second, the judges during this period were more military leaders or “avenging deliverers” than they were civil magistrates (cf. Judg. 2:16-19). Because of this fact, we must ask ourselves if we can even consider Deborah to be a “judge” in the same sense as the other judges in the book. The account of Deborah is unique in that she did not lead Israel into battle herself (as did the other judges in the book), but, rather, the Lord choose Barak to be the military commander. Would it not be more accurate to say that Barak was the true “judge” here (cf. Heb. 11:32 where Barak alone is mentioned), and that Deborah’s role was that of a “prophetess” who gave divine guidance to Israel?

Third, the Song of Deborah and Barak gives some important insight into Deborah’s actual position in Israel (Judg. 5:1-31). In verse 7, she claims to be a “mother” in Israel, not a father. This is significant, given the headship of the father in Israel, and it is in line with our suggestion that her role was one of support and guidance to the leaders of Israel as a prophetess. Additionally, verse 9 indicates that there were yet “governors” (literally, lawgivers, or leaders) in Israel. This would refer to the elders of the people and the rulers of the tribes.

This further supports the idea that the judge was not a civil magistrate in the usual sense, but rather a military leader and deliverer — Deborah was neither a “judge” nor a magistrate. Also, in verse 12 of the song, Deborah is exhorted to awake and sing, but Barak is exhorted to arise and “lead,” indicating that Barak is the military leader. Additionally, the “dominion over the mighty” in verse 13 is either a reference to Israel’s victory over Sisera and the Canaanites, or to the gathering of the people to go up to battle; whichever, it does not mean that God has appointed Deborah to the position of civil magistrate.

There is no question that Deborah was a great and godly woman who had considerable influence in Israel. But in the light of the evidence it is highly questionable to build a doctrine of women rulers from the case of Deborah. Deborah’s role in Israel was that of a “prophetess,” but not that of a civil ruler or military leader. The text does not support the idea that she was a civil magistrate. She “judged” Israel (Judg. 4:4) only in the sense that she was sought out by the people for advice and judgment in the settlement of disputes because of her wisdom from God. Apparently the priests and Levites were so corrupt that the people had to seek wisdom and judgment from this godly woman. But let us not seek in Deborah a doctrine of women rulers, and thereby become guilty of setting aside the definite precepts and commandments of God which forbid women magistrates.

Conclusion
In view of the biblical evidence presented above, it can be concluded that women ought not to be civil leaders; only men have been called of God to exercise rule in the civil sphere. For those who believe in the full inspiration and authority of the Bible, how can there be any other verdict than this? To assert that God’s Word permits a woman to hold civil office and that Christians have the liberty to support a woman for the position of civil magistrate means that one has to deny the biblical teaching on the headship of man, reject the qualifications for civil rulers set down in the law of God, ignore the biblical picture of the virtuous woman, and close his or her ears to the biblical lament of women ruling over men.

The example of Deborah does not give sufficient evidence to prove that she held the office of civil ruler or to overturn the biblical doctrine that men alone are called of God to the office of civil magistrate. Therefore, Christians should not support a woman for the office of civil magistrate. It is imperative that Christians labor to restore God’s order for the family, the church, and the state. If we violate God’s order in any way or in any sphere, we will have confusion and will invite God’s judgment on us. God forbid that we would ever be so foolish.

As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.

Isaiah 3:12

What Role Is Hull Western Christian
Playing To Undermine Christian Homes?

Western Christian High School, Hull, Iowa (WCH) recently distributed a flyer, Stewardship & Sustainability, into the mailboxes of many supporting churches in NW Iowa.  One needs to read it carefully to determine how harmful it is. Please read on for unknown information that reveals the board and senior administrator’s true agenda.

This flyer explains why they want a major increase in tuition for most parents. But consider the implications of what they are saying, more so, what they are not saying, and what they are hiding by not speaking plainly. The chart published in their flyer shows that the total cost of education per student is $14,800 and the parent contribution portion is $11,400 per child. I’ve been told that SW Christian High School, Edgerton, MN, tuition is $7,500 per student, half of WCH’s total cost.  Now consider the propaganda found throughout WCH’s flyer. 

But first, consider this brief review of the hidden character of propaganda.  Propaganda tactics have long used abstract words appealing to emotion and principles without plain language, clarity, or discernment.

As French Reformed legal scholar and philosopher Jacques Ellul writes in his book Propaganda: The Formation Of Men’s Attitudes, “Propaganda cannot be satisfied with partial success, for it does not tolerate discussion; by its very nature, it excludes contradiction and discussion.” p 11 Further, Ellul writes, “In every situation, propaganda hands him (sic. the recipient) the proof that he, personally, is in the right, that the action demanded of him is just, even if he has the dark, strong feeling that it is not.” p 158

Ellul is clear that effective propaganda includes many truthful statements, mixed in with its poison. We can all agree with statements in WCH’s flyer like, “…to raise our children in the light of God’s Word.” and “..providing Christ-centered education for generations to come.”  Propagandists know it is easier for the reader to ignore disturbing themes while reading such positive themes.

People who have succumbed to propaganda do not want to be contradicted or entertain discussion. They often get angry with those who dare question where propaganda is hiding the truth or failing to speak plainly. But what does the Bible tell us to do?

Numbers 12:8 says, “I speak with him face to face, Even plainly, and not in dark sayings;..”  Deut. 27:8 says, “And you shall write very plainly on the stones all the words of this law.” John 11:14, says, “Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead.”  We are not to hide the truth from our brethren.  1 Sam. 3:17 says, “And he said, “What is the word that the Lord spoke to you? Please do not hide it from me. God do so to you, and more also, if you hide anything from me of all the things that He said to you.”

Propaganda Illustrations
Consider WCH’s concealments in the second paragraph.  They write that “Christian schools model responsible financial management…” Model, used as a verb here, means “fashion or shape some malleable material” and/or it means to “imitate.” How is WCH shaping or imitating responsible monetary management? What exactly are they shaping? How well are they imitating such responsibility and who are they imitating? As you see below, they are certainly not imitating Unity Christian High School. Why not plainly write, “Christian schools practice responsible financial management”?   Is it because they don’t practice such responsibility?  What are they hiding by using “model”?

In the third paragraph, where they wrote about, “…state and federal spending in public schools…” they overlooked local property taxes that fund a sizable portion of local public schools.  (I.e. Boyden-Hull CSD collected 40.0% of their annual revenue in FY2023 through property taxes.)   This could have been an oversight, or they don’t want to remind WCH stakeholders, being asked for more money for WCH, that many of them are also funding the secular public schools.  And a side note – I imagine they don’t want you to know that Dordt President Erick Hoekstra campaigned in Sioux Center to Vote Yes supporting property tax increases a few years ago, to help build a new building for the local government school.

Then, in the context of stewardship, WCH wrote, “We believe Western Christian provides tremendous value for the families it serves.”  Why is it a belief?!  Why not demonstrate this value? Financial records of local public schools are available on the Iowa Dept. of Education’s (IDE) website. Why not briefly research and demonstrate WCH’s “tremendous value?”

In the fourth paragraph, they cite The Center for the Advancement of Christian Education (CACE), as an authority on Christian school financial management. CACE’s Exec. Dir. is Tim Van Soelen, the son of former WCH Senior Administrator Marion Van Soelen. Marion was one of the last ones to oversee a building project at WCH.  Then WCH reports that “CACE strongly recommends (working towards) the following metrics: •Charge the True Cost of Education Per Student…”  In finance ‘metric’ as a technical noun, is used in percentages, ratios, etc. – performances, which are precisely measured. But WCH is listing general items. Why not use the plain term “goals”? Is ‘metric’ used to appear precise amidst their vagueness?

Their new goal is to ‘charge the ‘true cost’ of education’…to whom? The parents? If so, why not plainly say that? If not parents, then charge it to whom?

Then WCH states another ‘metric,’ “●All Operational Expenses Covered by Budgeted Items” So what does this mean?  I have examined the financial statements of hundreds of commercial banks, public schools, ag operations, and commercial businesses.  With my training and experience, this still tells me nothing. Aren’t these expenses already covered by budgeted items?  If not, explain why not and who covers them now. And how much of the budget do these items cover?

In the last paragraph on page one, the flyer says WCH’s “Board of Trustees and Leadership will be intentional about shrinking the gap between the true cost of education and what we charge for tuition.”  Who would unintentionally shrink this gap? Why is the word ‘intentional’ even needed? The flyer is thankful for its ‘partnerships’ with area churches and other financial supporters of their mission. Don’t partners normally have proportionate authority?  Why not call these churches and others what they are – donors?  

Trying To Generate $1,000,000 Per Year In New Cash Flow
Again, the flyer reports a $3,400 difference between the cost of education and the tuition that parents pay. WCH also reported to the IDE that their enrollment this past Fall (2024) was 301 students.  $3,400 times 301 students equals $1,023,000. This is the amount they propose parents cover in higher tuition, or as they call it “shrinking the gap” between the total cost and the tuition.

Then they show their hand. Once they raise tuition to cover that $3,400 per student, then a “significant portion of donations” can go toward the Board’s “comprehensive capital campaigns” and “future expansion to meet the needs of our growing student population.”

Public school building proposals in the upper Midwest routinely include a grossly disproportionate share of square footage dedicated to athletics. Is this possibly what WCH Trustees have in mind? A major expansion in their athletic facilities?

In my political consulting work, I routinely expose fraudulent misrepresentations of student “growth” to justify new buildings by government (public) schools. Even with a sustained collapse in the birth rates for several decades across the upper Midwest in every school bond fight I’ve consulted in (hired by clients), the school board deceitfully declares their enrollment numbers are growing. I help reveal to voters this is not true, or at best, they exaggerate a brief deviation.

Now WCH has joined this deceit!  WCH reported to the IDE last Fall’s (2024) enrollment at 301 students. They reported 298 students enrolled in 2010 and 419 students enrolled in 2000. Their enrollment has “grown” by three students in the last 15 years and has declined by 118 students in the last 25 years.

If they free up $1,023,000 per year by making parents pay more, how much can they spend on new buildings?  In the worst case, $1,000,000 per year paid by WCH over 25 years at 4.5% could amortize a $14,800,000 bond, that is, upfront money to spend on buildings.

Cutting Wasteful Salaries At Western Christian High
Let’s say, for illustration, that parents and families would still support a $10 million bond to add WCH building space to “accommodate” their 28% enrollment decline, over the last 25 years. Might there be another way to pay for it than out of the pockets of parents? Here’s an idea. Fire some employees and cut the salaries of others!

If WCH could get their salaries in line with Unity Christian High School (UCHS), they could annually save nearly $900,000. As a Non-Profit, WCH is required to file public tax returns with the IRS (990 PF).  The most recent year they’ve been published is 2022.  I divided the total salaries by the grades 9-12 enrollment provided by IDE. Total salary expenses at WCH were $11,085 per student.  They were $7,955 at UCHS, a $3,130 per student difference. This amount multiplied by 284 students (2022) equals $888,000.  See the chart above. This “proposed” $10 million bond would cost $675,000 per year to amortize and they’d have $213,000 ($888,000 – $675,000) left over.  Again, this assumes the parents agree to this massive tuition increase along with a possible $10 million WCH building proposal.

How sure am I about these excessive salaries? Look at the chart above to see the growth in WCH’s salaries compared to UCHS, which now has more students enrolled than WCH.

Who’s getting overpaid at WCH?  In public schools, the large increases in salary expenses often go to the administrators. How much are Brian Verwolf and Justin Negen making?

Verwolf’s peer, Jay Woudstra, at Sioux Falls Christian High School, made $225,000 in the 2022 tax year.

Also, the IDE says UCHS’s guidance counselor holds a ‘coaching certificate.’  WCH’s Career and College Counselor, Molly Khang, has a Professional Services License with a Master of Arts as a Licensed Professional Counselor. The cost difference between the two should be investigated. If WCH cut their excessive salaries, they could fund the debt payments for a $10 million building upgrade to ‘accommodate’ their long-term declining enrollment.

Here’s The Long-Term Harm Being Done By WCH
WCH’s flyer then states their students “…graduate well prepared for the workforce or further education.”  Notice the glaring absence of what they are not preparing female students for? Their only two options, according to WCH, are the workforce, where they can pay more taxes, be away from home, and then labor to pay for the Christian school tuition of future children which she may have if she gets married. Or she can borrow a lot of money to go to college and get an often-worthless degree in the social sciences (I.e. psychology) while helping ensure the academic social engineers at Dordt and Calvin remain well-employed. I call it supporting the Christian Education-Industrial Complex.

After college graduation, female students are often straddled with massive student loan payments, a high-end lifestyle that high school and college taught them, and high-dollar tuition payments incurred by any future children she has. Worse, she could be swirling down the financial drain and be tempted to focus on her career and not even desire marriage.  This has already become a stark reality after what I hear from young Christian Reformed men.  Two generations of pushing girls into the workforce or into college have done tremendous damage to the covenant community of believers of Jesus Christ.  Family formations have nearly collapsed.   Many authors have documented that the roots of feminism (who were the ones agitating women to work out of the home) are truly Satanic. Ask me for a reading list, if you are interested.   Young men in churches are starting to awaken.  See this great conversation about the harm of women working out of the home here.

Two Kids In A Family At WCH Cost Nearly $30,000 Per Year In Tuition!
When the Trustees increase tuition to a total of $14,800 per student, if a family has two children enrolled at WCH they would need to fund $29,600 per year (less any multiple-child discounts WCH may offer) in tuition.  Unless they have a local church or grandparents’ support, few families with moms at home will be able to afford this. What are they forced to do? The mother so often must leave home to go into the work world, where she often becomes submissive to a male employer in her job duties. This working arrangement is offensive to honest husbands. Too many husbands have become emasculated in this process!

Damage To Young Women And Their Future Homes
God did not make women able to manage the stress of the work world. That’s her husband’s responsibility. It places tension on her which she most often brings back home to her husband and children. She often brings it into the marriage bed.  Working women dealing with depression are the most drug-addicted people in America – think Prozac, Paxil, Luvox.  Worse, many married, working, women often cannot conceive a child until they quit work and set up a loving and peaceful home. Medically speaking, it is even worse for young wives who’ve previously been active in high-competition sports.  In the Garden of Eden God gave men one curse (to work and provide) and women the other curse (to bear and raise children). Why does WCH encourage girls to assume both curses?

Notice WCH’s website for Molly Khang’s job description. She is their Career and College Counselor – nothing about counseling young women being called to domestic life is mentioned in her title.  What advice will Khang give a young woman who does not want either a working career or college? It’s obvious Khang, herself, chose the career route.  What if a Senior girl wants to be married, the wife of a Godly husband, and begin bearing their covenant children into the world soon after high school – something that CRCNA young women routinely did 50+ years ago? Does Khang or anyone else at WCH affirm this calling, too?  Who at WCH teaches these verses, below, to the young women students there?

• Psalm 127:4-5 “As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.”
• 1 Corinthians 11:3 “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.”
• 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”
•  Ephesians 5:22-24 “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.”
• 1 Timothy 2:9-15 “in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and [a]moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.  For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless, she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.”
• 1 Peter 3:1-6 “Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear. Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel – rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.
• 1 Corinthians 7:1-5a “Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise, the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time,…”
• Titus 2:3-5 “the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things –  that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,  to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.”

Two generations of Christian Reformed academics, pastors, and women have twisted these texts and others to accommodate militant career women and the resulting destruction of marriage, promoting semi-barrenness (even Rev. Lee and Molly Khang and Rev. Philip Westra and his wife in the Heartland Classis have not had the statistical number of children needed (2.1) to replace themselves), emasculated men in the churches, mothers not home, angry youth, and the lack of interest in even getting married –  all contributing to the demographic collapse of the Christian Reformed Church North America. See chart below.

Also see the impact on Sioux County marriages over the last 23 years on this chart below.

As I told Waylon Pollema, director of campus safety and student support at WCH two years ago, his very presence on the grounds of a Christian High School is a sign of God’s judgment on the parents, Trustees, and area pulpits supporting WCH.  (Since then, Pollema was made a full-time police officer at WCH.)  I also told Pollema, “I graduated from UCHS in 1974 and the idea that our school would need a full-time cop on staff was unthinkable.”  How much violence and criminal conduct is occurring among angry youth at WCH?  Though I can’t confirm it, I suspect WCH is the only high school in the four NW Iowa corner countries having a full-time public safety officer.

Mothers leaving their homes along with Christian high schools making athletics into their idols (new gyms and all) is accelerating God’s curse on His Kingdom people.

We’ve all sinned to some degree in these affairs.  And some women are forced to work out of temporary economic deprivation. But too often we’ve not taught our children properly these matters and we’ve let our vanity, envy, avarice, and idolatries dictate our “faith”.  Deut. 8:11-20 should serve as a sober warning. 

To those women who cry out, “But I have to work because of the high cost of living!” – I would be pleased to meet her and her husband, as a former community bank owner, and explain the Federal Reserve and what a family can do, to mitigate the Fed’s malevolence.  (Prov. 20:10)   If that is, her cry is not a mask for the vain, envious, and selfish lifestyle she is trying to justify.

Though not Reformed, young Christian women should start reading The Transformed Wife both on her website and on Facebook.

Is it time for a Reformed home-school cooperative to arise here in NW Iowa? It could help stay-at-home moms provide excellent Christian education in their homes while sharing skill sets with other moms to supplement training in subjects one mom may be weak in while having a ‘strength’ in another subject she can offer to the student coop.  And they can invest significant amounts of money saved into a family business!

Meanwhile, I would not give a dime to Western Christian High School.

In Christ,

Paul R. Dorr
P.O Box 115
Ocheyedan, IA  51354
Ph 712-758-3660
Email rtp@iowatelecom.net

Download and print this letter which was sent to Hull Western Christian’s career counselor Molly Khang, the school’s senior administrator Brian Verwolf, and Mrs. Khang’s husband, Rev. Lee Khang, pastor of Ocheyedan Christian Reformed Church, Ocheyedan, Iowa and several members of the school board, well over a month ago. Rescue The Perishing’s director, Paul Dorr, provided them one week to review and let him know if they wanted to have a private conversation, together, before this was released to the public. None of them responded. Ask them why they didn’t want to discuss any alleged errors with Dorr privately. False accusations and gossiping have often been the responses Dorr has received over the years regarding other such public exposures.

Students, Rescue the Perishing is convinced that three generations of Reformed Christians have failed to uphold our covenant faith. Dorr is a Boomer and is convinced that his generation and those before him led the failure. Like Elihu (Job 32) we now need the young people to call the Boomer generation to repentance and back to the ‘old paths'(Jeremiah 6:16), lest we die.

Young women! If your conscience is quietly telling you that the course Molly Khang took is not for you, consider the Titus 2 teachings of an older Christian mother, Lori Alexander, known on Facebook as The Transformed Wife. Alexander is not Reformed so some of her teachings to young women on justification and sanctification are in error. But her teaching of what the Bible teaches women about husbands, marriage, family, child-rearing, etc. are powerful. She is converting thousands of “feminist” Christian women to leave the work world and come home. It’s amazing to watch how the Holy Spirit uses her ministry to gently confront the mocking, scoffing feminist women in the pews and watch, months later as they post their confession of their feminist sinful beliefs and actions, tell how they learned to live off their husbands’ income and be willing to have more babies, and their gratitude to Christ and how he is using Lori to break their hardened hearts. A recent post on Facebook came from a young female Christian doctor who was making $210,000 per year. See The Transformed Wife.

And again, please download and read the letter above Dorr wrote to Mrs. Khang and give it to your parents and church elders. Dorr can be reached at Ph 712-758-3660 or rtp@iowatelecom.net

Update: This recent article below confirms Dorr’s assessment that the younger men in the CRCNA are now challenging the boomer generation of pastors. Praise God! See the article A Surprising Generational Rift in the Christian Reformed Church.

The Right of Conscience Over Elders

It is not unbelievers primarily but the devout who have always experienced this power of the hierarchy as a galling bond to their consciences. Throughout the centuries there has not only been scientific, societal, and political resistance but also deeply religious and moral opposition to the hierarchical power of the church. It simply will not do to explain this opposition in terms of unbelief and disobedience and intentionally to misconstrue the religious motives underlying the opposition of various sects and movements. No one has been bold enough to damn all these sects because they were moved to resist the church and its tradition. Even Rome shrinks from this conclusion.

The extra ecclesiam nulla salus (no salvation outside the church) is a confession that is too harsh for even the most robust believer. Accordingly, the “law” we see at work in every area of life is operative also in religion and morality. On the one hand, there is a revolutionary spirit that seeks to level all that has taken shape historically in order to start rebuilding things from the ground up. There is, however, also a false conservatism that takes pleasure in leaving the existing situation untouched simply because it exists and—in accordance with Calvin’s familiar saying—not to attempt to change a well-positioned evil (malum bene positum non movere).

At the proper time, everywhere and in every sphere of life, a certain radicalism is needed to restore balance, to make further development possible, and not let the stream of ongoing life bog down. In art and science, state and society, similarly in religion and morality, there gradually develops a mindless routine that oppresses and does violence to the rights of personality, genius, invention, inspiration, freedom, and conscience. But in due time there always arises a man or woman who cannot bear that pressure, casts off the yoke of bondage and again takes up the cause of human freedom and that of Christian Liberty. These are turning points in history. Thus Christ himself rose up against the tradition of the elders and returned to the law and the prophets. Thus one day the Reformation had the courage, not in the interest of some scientific, social or political goal, but in the name of Christian humanity, to protest against Rome’s hierarchy. Frequently, even in the case of the sects and movements that later arose in the Protestant churches, that religious and ethical motive is undeniably present.  So-called biblical theology also defends an important part of religious truth. When a church and theology prefer peace and quiet over struggle, they themselves trigger the opposition that reminds them of their Christian calling and task.”

Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. I, pp. 81-82.

So in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God.  Acts 5:38-39

Trask Ranch Picnic Speech, July 13, 2024
Paul Dorr’s Speech Given On The Shores of Cheyenne River at the Trask Ranch Annual Picnic In Western South Dakota

Reference links to the speech below:

Governor Kristi Noem:
Open Letter to South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem on the Talmudic threat to the free speech of South Dakota Christians.

See Noem’s tie to pro-Israel dispensationalism below.
_______________________________________
U.S. Senator John Thune:
Lyman Stewart, founder of Biola College was a dispensationalist.
Thune is one of the most notable alumni of dispensational Biola. John Thune also attends dispensational Central Baptist church.
_______________________________________
South Dakota Trusts:
FDIC Banking Deposits by state. Replace “National” in the geographic area filters with South Dakota, New York and Texas…after that you can enter any state(s) you want.

South Dakota Trust Company.
_______________________________________
Billy Graham:
Birth Control:
“The Rev. Dr. Billy Graham believes there is nothing morally wrong in the practice of Birth Control…Graham emphasized that birth control was an import answer to the “terrifying and tragic” problem of overpopulation, that there was nothing wrong in Scripture that barred its responsible use, and that the majority of Americans used contraception in any case, “whether they be Protectant or Roman Catholic.” New York Times, 12/13/1959, as cited in Godly Seed: American Evangelicals Confront Birth Control, 1873-1973, by Allan Carlson, p 125-126

Graham’s Talmudic Lawyer on Abortion:
“Harold O. J. Brown entertained hopes that Billy Graham, by far the most influential figure in American evangelicalism at the time, would lend his name to the [sic. Christian Action Council] organization as Koop and Schaeffer had done. After all, Brown’s books carried Graham’s endorsements, and Graham stepped up to provide meeting space in Montreat, NC, for the brainstorming session that gave rise to the CAC.

To that extent, Stephen P. Miller is correct when he claims that “Graham… helped to found a pioneering Protestant antiabortion organization, the Christian Action Council.” However, when it came time to be “in” or “out”, Graham backed away, much to Brown’s lingering dismay. Brown suspected that Graham’s attorney, who also worked with the ACLU, scared Graham and his board away from endorsing the CAC (advising that such stated opposition to a Supreme Court decision could threaten the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association’s tax-exempt status).

Grant Wacker, professor at Duke Divinity School and Graham’s recent biographer, believes that Graham’s reticence was in keeping with his general character. According to Wacker, Graham had a history of providing initial support to causes like the CAC but stopping with that…..In Wacker’s words, “Graham dipped his toes in a lot of ponds, but when it came time to take a bath, he wouldn’t do it.” However, Wacker also recalls, “Graham did have a Jewish attorney with the ACLU. He was very proud of that—it showed he could reach across lines.”

In Brown’s mind, Graham’s relegating abortion to a non-essential in his ministry meant that Graham’s Gospel, though accurate in what it did proclaim, was truncated by virtue of what it did not proclaim.” p. 119-121

“No Diga Mentiras”: The Pivotal Role Of Harold O.J. Brown In The Emergence Of The Evangelical Pro-Life Movement, A Thesis Submitted To The Faculty In Partial Fulfillment Of The Requirements For The Degree Master Of Theology, Matthew S. Miller, Erskine Theological Seminary, Due West, SC, April 4, 2015
_______________________________________
McHugh and Dr. Calderone:
Bishop James T. McHugh, initial organizer of the National Right to Life Committee and Dr. Mary Calderone, former Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, working jointly to organize SIECUS, with their agenda to promote classroom sex talk across America. Read The SIECUS Circle.

I.e. “Like its parent organization, SIECUS, the AASEC (American Association of Sex Educators and Counselors) has a close relationship with a bawdy magazine, Sexology….Also cooperating in the 1969 conference as a panel discussion participant was another AASEC Advisory Committee member, (then) Monsignor James T. McHugh, director of the Family Life Division of the U.S. Catholic Conference. The association of a Catholic priest with AASEC is a paradox in itself, considering the fact that AASEC membership is generously laced with Planned Parenthood activists.” p 155,

“Dr. Mary S. Calderone, executive director, had the vision to see the need for an organization such as SIECUS, gave it its structure , standards and goals, saw it through its infancy and early childhood, and in the face of almost insurmountable odds brought it to maturity in the remarkably short period of four years.” citing Lester Doniger, President of SIECUS, p 11 The SIECUS Circle by Claire Chambers

Also read one of my heroes and former colleague Mrs. Randy Engel’s report here.
_______________________________________
Dispensationalism:
Minnesota’s Baptist Pastor Riley and C.I. Scofield at Moody Bible Institute conference in 1914.

Billy Graham launches dispensational radio network in Minneapolis. Now broadcasts on 104 outlets in 10 states including KNWC now known as Life96.5 in Sioux Falls, SD.

Central Church, Sioux Falls, SD, doctrine of Christ to return to establish his Kingdom. See No. 12 under The Last Things.

Governor Kristi Noem is a member of the Family Worship Center in Watertown, which is a member of the Four Square Church denomination. I note from their website that three of their four senior, executive and worship pastors in Watertown are women. Please consider the great error that the President of the Four Square, Randy Remington, makes about Israel, when he writes, “The promise of God to Abraham not only included a land with actual borders but an actual people/nation as his offspring that would be too numerous to number. God sovereignly fulfilled these promises of a people and place, as evidenced in the pages of scripture and our bearing witness to these facts over the past century. Israel’s land and people are miraculously unique and prophetically vital to God’s earthly plans.”

A great theological study on how dispensationalism necessarily leads to antinomianism, that is, the rejection of God’s Law, the Pentateuch.

Who is True Israel? See here.

Want to begin your study on the errors of John Thune’s and Kristi Noem’s dispensational theology? Consider this list of books.
_______________________________________
Talmudism:
New Chabad Lubavitch Rabbi in South Dakota.

Download .PDF copy of The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Kilpatrick Dilling.

Karaite Rabbi Condemns Talmud Go to Chapter 1 – About the Oral Law, Canto 1

Oldest synagogue in Old City Jerusalem Jewish Quarter – Karaite synagogue.

A Jewish Defector Warns America:
Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Talmudic Zionism _______________________________________
Leslee Unruh:
Salaries saving babies: $176,300 FY2019
CPCs fueling mass murder by abortion for decades.
“Pro-life” young woman testifies before South Dakota legislature while still fornicating with her boyfriend. Counseled by Unruh.
Alpha Center’s degrading abstinence material being used 25+ years ago.

Leslee Unruh’s first husband was a disc jockey at the Sioux Falls dispensational “Christian” radio station KNWC.

Unruh turns the F.B.I. loose on Sioux Falls Operation Rescue leader, Paul Dorr
Leslee Unruh should have been charged with making materially false statements (under 18 U.S.C. § 1001) – multiple times – in this report to the F.B.I. on Paul Dorr. The more Dorr was holding her accountable to God’s Law the more false stories were spread by her. It was malicious. Finally, she took it to the F.B.I., falsely claiming Dorr intended to do violence and that she was afraid of him. Dorr only learned of the federal crimes she was committing well after the statue of limitations had expired. Dorr did a FOIA request of the US Department of Justice and later received this heavily redacted FBI Investigation file. This is lengthy, so scan through it to find the red arrows, red boxes and yellow highlights.