Comments on: Mahaney: “Worldliness,” ch. 5 https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/ fundamentalism by blunt instrument Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:24:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: Kent Brandenburg https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12411 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 07:24:55 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12411 If our church agrees that the Bible teaches it, which seems to be what evangelicals are saying (or why would they be saying it), then we would discipline. On all matters of discipline, there is tremendous patience—instruction, help, time spent, waiting, but it is a process of discipleship for a church. If someone is rebellious against the teaching, and divisive, then we would discipline. Certainly, church activities and general behavior of a church that believes in modesty would be modesty—not widespread immodesty, nothing enforced, yet with a book written against immodesty—then its just all talk.

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12409 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 06:24:24 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12409 In reply to Kent Brandenburg.

Hi Kent,

Interesting. At some point I think it might become an issue of discipline, but at what level would you discipline someone for immodest dress and, assuming refusal of repentance, what would be your Scriptural grounds for such discipline?

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: Kent Brandenburg https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12408 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 05:59:57 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12408 It doesn’t surprise me that some evangelicals talk about immodesty. However, if immodesty is unbiblical and a sin, then it is an issue of church discipline. Do evangelical churches forbid the wearing of these things, the typical beach or swimming pool attire in public? If this is an issue of the heart, and about God, then it would be. If it is only about appearing to be against immodesty, then nothing will be done about it but talk.

]]>
By: Keith https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12403 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 00:02:42 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12403 I think that I am always interacting with what is said. A different perspective, or even disagreement, is not a lack of interaction.

Either way, I’m fine leaving it with the readers to judge.

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12400 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 21:57:54 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12400 In reply to Keith.

well, Keith, we can leave it to the readers to judge. You rarely want to interact with what is said.

When you say, “I do think that some time spent pondering the distinction between mocking a certain approach to modesty and the Biblical teaching on modesty might be illuminating” are you saying that Mahaney’s teaching isn’t biblical? Because I am affirming his teaching on this subject, with some quibbles. But as far as it goes, I basically agree with his teaching on modesty and thought I said so.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: Keith https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12399 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 21:48:31 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12399 “Can’t you take someone at their word? There are so-called fundamentalists (evangelical wannabes) who will mock the teaching concerning modesty.”

Sure I can take someone at their word, when their word is what is in question. However, your word doesn’t get to establish what is reality in evangelicalism — something other than your word is in question there.

Further, you didn’t say anything in your previous comment about it being “so called fundamentalists (evangelical wannabes)” mocking fundamentalists. I assumed you were talking about evangelicals mocking fundamentalists. I apologize for the faulty assumption.

I’ll take you at your word that you know some “so called fundamentalists” who mock the teaching on modesty. Although, I do think that some time spent pondering the distinction between mocking a certain approach to modesty and the Biblical teaching on modesty might be illuminating. There is a difference between rejecting certain cultural approaches to modesty and rejecting the Bible’s teaching on the subject.

“And you wonder why we think you just want to argue? Sheesh!”

Well, if you can take me at my word, no I don’t “just” want to argue. You have been saying certain things about worldliness and about evangelicalism that I find harmful, and so I’ve commented on that — because I believe and care about what I’ve commented, not just to argue.

Nevertheless, at worst, I’ve interacted with your arguments and teaching in a way similar to what you are doing with Maheney’s book. Not sure why what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander.

Ed seems to be making the points I’d like to make better than I am. So, I’ll bow out and let him continue.

]]>
By: Ed https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12395 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:43:49 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12395 I agree with you that ostentatious dress is a problem that has been largely ignored. I think in our culture at large that immodesty is a greater problem than ostentatious dress. But within many churches, we fail to take 1 Tim 2:9 (and James 2:2) seriously, allowing women to be “modest” in the sense that their bodies are covered but very immodest in that their dress brings unnecessary attention to themselves (or their wealth).

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12393 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:07:27 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12393 In reply to Ed.

Ok, I looked at the quote again. He said, “Today, the issue is immodest and sensual clothing more than ostentatious attire.” So he didn’t say ostentation wasn’t a problem. But he clearly wants to talk about immodesty only, and for the most part, other than a few oblique comments at the end, stays on topic.

But surely ostentation ought to be a pastoral concern today, no? It apparently isn’t too much of one, since so many dress so fine in churches all across the land. I have held to the notion that we should dress more formally when we attend Sunday services, but I am coming to think this can be a problem as well.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>
By: Ed https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12391 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 19:46:38 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12391 Unless your quotations is not representative of Mahaney’s position, he doesn’t clearly state it’s not an issue:

“Today, the issue is immodest and sensual clothing more than ostentatious attire”

So if I said “I like Mahaney more than Johnson”, would that be a clear statement that I don’t like you at all? Then later, if I said, “I do like Johnson” I would be inconsistent?

]]>
By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/comment-page-1/#comment-12389 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 19:23:18 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2011/06/07/mahaney-worldliness-ch-5/#comment-12389 In reply to Ed.

No, don’t think so. It’s just Keith.

I am reading the book because a friend of mine asked me to. I decided to share my observations on line as a way of thinking through the book as I read it. (In fact, it isn’t my copy… my friend mailed it to me, all the way from Noo York, because he thinks I’m a bigot too. He’s right.)

It is hard to read without preconceptions, and I expected to disagree with the book to some extent.

However, please note my essay on ch. 3. I was surprised by Kauflin’s position on music which wasn’t as bad as I expected. In fact, I think he makes my arguments on the subject, just doesn’t realize the implications of his own positions.

I admit I am negative, especially about Mahaney. It bugs me when the scriptures are mishandled. I really don’t care who is doing it. In this case I happen to be writing about an evangelical book.

I’ll offer a summary critique after I post my observations on the last chapter. That one is in the works.

And… Mahaney clearly states ostentatious clothing is no issue. His later comments show a bit of inconsistency on that, but that is his statement.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]>