Family Affairs

Grace Family Baptist Church presents the twenty twelve Sipar Refermanda Conference. This year's conference is focused on church membership. Will now join Pastor Bodibako as he preaches on family affairs, federal or individual membership. The reasons that we're discussing this is because there are there's a twofold reason. One, it's a legitimate question. And if there are some people who do argue for federal membership, we are not among them, but we have been lumped in with them. In fact, there was a discussion and it was rather public, a rather public discussion between myself and ANDREWS. Cosenberger. In his updated edition of God, Marriage and Family, he wrote a ch after critiquing Family Integrated Church, and there were there were several issues that we had with the chapter, and he and I kind of, you know, went back and forth talking about those issues that we had with the chapter. And one of the things that I said was that the source material was was insufficient and in some instances inappropriate, and he admitted that actually one of the sources that he quoted did not exist, you know. But anyway, he went on to ask me a question and wanted me to sort of go on the record on this issue, and the question was whether we had, you know, practice of regenerate church membership or federal family membership. And I just I just thought for a moment, Okay, if Andrea's Costenberger doesn't know that, probably other people who don't know that. So that's just the other reason that we believe that it's important to deal with this because some people assume that if you talk about the family in the Great Church, and if you talk about discipleship in and through homes and the importance of discipleship in and through homes, if you have an emphasis on fathers and their role and their headship, and this idea of jurisdiction and those very distinct lines of jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the home, the jurisdiction of the church, and the jurisdiction of the civil government, that it kind of follows that you would think about membership in this way. If you remember, it wasn't long ago that much of society was thought about in this way. A lot of people, for example, think that the women's suffrage movement and the whole question of women and the women's right to vote had to do with what we as a society thought about women. Really didn't. It really had to do with this idea of representation. And so here was the idea that we had. Our government is a it is a constitutional republic, okay, it is a constitutional representative republic. And as a constitutional representative republic, we're represented on various different levels by various different individuals. And so we have people who represent us at the federal level, and so we have people who represent us in the executive office president and vice president. And then you know, legislatively, we have people who represent us our congressmen and our senators. Our senators used to represent our states, you know, being sent directly from our state legislatures picked by our states legislatures before the sixteenth Amendment, if I'm not mistaken, And so we were represented there, and then locally we were represented by our mayor, and then we're represented by the city councilmen from our district, and we're represented by and then in our family, we were represented by they had a household. So again, it didn't have anything to do necessarily with our view of women. And people who think about membership in that way are kind of coming from the same perspective, but that's not our position. And one of the reasons that it's very difficult for me to comprehend why people can get that one so wrong is that we're very clear about the fact that we are a confessional church and that our confession is the Second London Baptist Confession of sixteen eighty nine. This is a hymnal that we use. We use the Trinity Hymnal Baptist edition. And one of the reasons that we use this hymnals because in the back of it is the Second London Baptist Confession of sixteen eighty nine. So let me read to you just confessionally where we're coming from here. This is chapter twenty six of the Church. Let me give you a third reason. Here's the third reason, and this is ironic with the Costenberger piece as well, because we use this phrase family of families. You know that the church is ultimately a family of families that are smallest that our smallest division's households, not Sunday school departments. And so there are people who've taken issue with that and said, well, that's a problem. And you know, if you think about if you're using that phrase, and you're obviously talking about, you know, federal membership, not individual membership, so on and so forth. Ironically, Costenberger uses the phrase family of families in the first edition of chy marriagean family, where he didn't credic the family and the Great Church, so that since he critiqued us for using that phrase, he wouldn't include it in his revised edition. But he did so he used the phrase and then later on critiqued us for using the phrase. Go figure, but we're not talking about membership, about structure. What do we believe about membership? Let's look at this paragraph, this chapter, just a couple of paragraphs. We paragraph two, all persons throughout the world professing the faith of the Gospel. This is all persons, individuals, persons and obedience under God by Christ according unto it, not destroying their own profession. We got persons and their own professions. By any errors averting to foundations or unholiness of conversations are and may be called visible saints. And of such are all particular congregations to be constituted of professing believers. We believe in and try to practice regenerate church membership of professing believers. You come for membership individually, not collectively. Look at paragraphs six. The members of these churches are saints by calling, not families, visibly manifesting and evidencing in and by their profession and walking their obedience onto that call of Christ, and do willingly consent to walk together according to the appointment of Christ, giving up themselves to the Lord and one to another by the will of God, in professed subjection to the ordinances of the Gospel. Further down para paragraphs well, as all believers are bound to join themselves to particular churches when and where they have opportunity so to do so, all that are admitted under the privileges of the Church are also under the censures and government thereof according to the rule of Christ. So again each of those three paragraphs one. We believe in regenerate church membership that in order to be a member of the Church, you must be born again. As one of the difference between us and our Presbyterian brethren and our understanding of covenant versus theirs, we understand that they understand church membership to be members and their covenant children. We understand church membership to be professing believers. Baptized believers, people who are baptized as believers, and so what we're called baptists because that's the front door and the entrance into membership in the church. One of the problems with the idea of federal membership or family membership is that if the father is the representative member on behalf of his family, then we would be admitting into membership individuals who are unconverted and unbaptized. Were no longer baptist at that point? Did you follow? We're no longer baptist at that point because we're admitting into membership individuals who are unconverted and unbaptized. Also, if you look at that paragraph twelve, the idea of people submitting themselves to the censures of the church. Church, Now, all of a sudden, we have members of the church who are unconverted and unbaptized. How do you discipline an unbeliever for being an unbeliever? That dog won't hunt. You can't get there. So we have members on our roles who are professed unbelievers, and then we practice church discipline, which is the process whereby we confront individuals whose profession of faith is not in accord with the life that they're living. You can't get there from here. Okay, So the idea of federal membership does does not work for us confessionally, theologically, philosophically, because we are a Baptist church, and because we practice and believe in regenerate church membership, and because it would be absolutely untenable as it relates to the discipline of the church. There are, of course other issues, and the other issues are every individual member has certain rights and privileges. Not just fathers, not just heads of household have rights and privileges in the church. But every member of the church has rights and privileges. And so again, federal membership would be a problem because it would be difficult, even impossible for us to recognize and acknowledge those rights and privileges within that context, you know. I mean, there are a variety of other issues that would arise, but those are sort of the main ones that lead us away from that direction. There are people, however, out there who do practice federal membership, who practice head of household membership. They tend to be, to the best of my knowledge, I think they're they're they're all in the Presbyterian vein already so that it fits you know, sort of better there. But that's still even rare, even in those circles. It's rare for people to practice federal membership. So how then do we acknowledge these particular jurisdictions and at the same time practice individual church membership. That's where some people think that there's sort of a problem, and I mean I don't think there is at all. For example, when we talk about those jurisdictions, here's where people have probably like, well, wait a minute, how can you uphold the father and his role in his home and his authority in his home and then not follow that through by supporting it with the idea of, you know, federal church membership. Well, because it's a different jurisdiction, do you follow where's his jurisdiction the home? Right? So for us to have sort of federal membership and to allow a father to kind of shape the membership for his individual family would be sort of akin to you know, there's signs out there that say no right, turn on red, and you could have fathers who, because they're the head of their households, say hey, and my family, we're going to make that turn. And then the police officers supposed to go, oh, okay, my bad, I didn't know that you, as the federal head of your household, had sort of made that decision for you and your family. No, why jurisdiction, That's not his jurisdiction. Okay, So when we think about that conflict, a lot of the thinking that says that there's some kind of conflict between the father and his role and his responsibilities and the idea of individual membership really comes from the fact, ironically, that people have taken the jurisdiction of the father and just spread it over all areas and avenues of life, which is the very opposite of respecting jurisdictions. Okay, your kids violate the laws of the state, you don't get to determine their punishment the state does. Your kid's a member in the church, you don't get to determine they're discipline by the church. The church does. Your kid wants membership in the church, you don't get to determine their membership in the church. The church does. That's not your jurisdiction. So you just can't walk up and go, hey, you know this one's ready, sign them up. Not your jurisdiction. That's the jurisdiction of the church. That's the church's responsibility. Okay, not devoid of input from families, not ignoring families, not lording it over families, but we have to understand and respect those jurisdictional lines. And I think the problem with the idea of federal membership is that it doesn't respect those jurisdictional lines. Okay, So what I'd like for us to do maybe is ask some questions about the issue of jurisdiction, the issue of membership, the issue of where those you know, lines are drawn. You know, how how we you know, operate in those sort of seemingly gray areas between the jurisdiction of the home and the jurisdiction of the church, How those things become synergistic as opposed to, you know, being opposed to one another. And any sort of practical, practical concerns that you might have in this area. I think one of the difficult time periods with the young person and has joined the church, and so they're doing something that requires level of discipline and so and maybe the parents is somber, yeah, not adults, yeah, between yeah, yeah, yeah, that's a great question. You would describe an example situation for that twelve to eighteene. Yeah, and and I don't know that i'd put it that high because I think if you get to sixteen, seventeen, eighteen nineteen, you're at a different you know, a ballgame at that at that point. Really, I think at twelve you're also at that different ball game. So the question is the question is, you know, how how do we walk that that fine line when a young person becomes a member and for us that you can't do that before you're twelve. But a young person becomes a member, they come and the evidence you know, the fruit of biblical conversion and repentance and faith. Uh, and they become a member and you know, they're baptized, they enter into full membership in the church. And then there are areas in their life that are areas of sin, areas of concern, and they're not really being addressed by their their their parents. Those areas are not really being addressed by their parents. And so you have a young person who's still under the authority of their their parents, but they're also members in the church. I think that the number one step in any of those things is that we address those individuals parents, that we bring that up with their parents. You know that that that that this is a particular issue that we've become aware of. The they're probably aware of it as well, you know, because ultimately, I think what we have there is we have a couple of issues of concern. One is a young member of the church who's involved in activity that is sinful and inappropriate, and two parents in the church who are sinfully negligent as it relates to the child, who's their responsibility. And so I think it's very important in those instances that we, you know, we that we address mom and dad, you know, with those concerns, and those things might have to be dealt with and escalated concurrently because they're they're linked inexorably. But we don't just sort of ignore the parental duty and responsibility just because an individual has become a member of the church, because again, there are other jurisdictional things to consider. That doesn't mean that the church couldn't, could not and would not at some point have to act, especially depending on the level of the behavior. But it does mean that we have to acknowledge the fact that they're in a very unique they're in a very unique circumstance living where they live and living under the thority that they live under, and that that sin ultimately is not just the sin of filling the blank that they're doing, but also would be a violation to the Fifth Commandment, which directly relates to their parents, and also the responsibility that the parents have to the child. So address it all together, source it with the parents, bring the kids in, deal with both things concurrently. Yes, sir said, if you're not the child, say you're still you see the child is still attack if you still I if if somebody's younger and they're not members, uh yeah, but but you see that, would you still address that with a parent? Absolutely? Absolutely, you you address that with with the parent. You know, that becomes even more significant because jurisdictionally, th that's that's their jurisdiction. You know, the the the sticky thing here becomes this person's a member, so they have that jewel, that dual jurisdiction thing going on right there. But but there, yeah, I you know, absolutely, you you address that, You address that with with the parents. If you're dealing with somebody who's who's younger, who's who's not a member, or who's older and who's not a member, you address that with their parents. Yeah, what's know, who even really has authority over another Sure, it's only Jesus. And in the blog I I don't know if there's more to it but a Bible where he he did say there's no such thing as the office of a deacon or the office of a pastor. But that's a rule, but not necessarily an authoritative role from the scripture where he can actually have authority over a church or another belief. Okay, So your your question would be, where in the scripture is the pastor or a deacon given actual authority over another believer? Where in scriptures as a pastor or a deacon ever given any kind of authority over another believer? A deacon is not. A deacon is not given authority anywhere in the scriptures, but elders are. Let's look at a few places here. Okay, let's look at uh. Let's lead at first Timothy three. And this person also says it's not an office, right, okay, pers me three. This saying is trustworthy if anyone aspires to the office of overseer, elder, oversere office, the office. Yeah, yeah, he desired, he desires a noble task Therefore, an overseer must be above approach the husband one wife, so reminded, self controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well with all dignity, keeping his children submissive. For if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? So the management and oversight that he has in his household is a testing improving ground because it's the same idea of the management and oversight that he has in the church. Let's go to Titus. You know his stin line Bibles are great. When you get to these New Testament letters, they're like a page of part Just flip over a few pages and you're gone. All right, Titus one, beginning of verse five. This is why I left you in crete, that you might put what remained into order and appoint elders in every town as I directed you appoint. You appoint people to offices. What else do you appoint people to? You appoint them to offices. Okay, if anyone is above, reproach the husband and one wife, children, believers, not over to the charge of the bauchery insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. So now he's appointed to an office. He's an overseer, which we also saw at first Timothy. That is an office of oversight and authority, just like the office of a father and a home. But we also see that he's God's steward. Well, what's a steward? One who exercises authority on behalf of another above approach must not be arrogant, quit chember of drunkard, violent, lover of money. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instructure and sound doctrine, and to rebuke those who contradict. It sounds pretty authoritative. Let's look at Hebrews. So you get Hebrews thirteen seventeen. Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. So now we're told to obey and submit, You only obey and submit to authority right, go back to I missed something here. I don't know how One Timothy, chapter five. You heard this last night, but this look at this again, okay, and again the contention is that no Christian has authority or any other Christian and that you know that that these positions aren't offices. You know, it's kind of this anti authoritarian you know, neverthless, kind of that gnostic idea. Again. We heard this last night, but listen to it again. One Timothy five seventeen. Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the scripture says you shall not muscle the ox. It treads out the grain, and the laborer deserves his wages. Okay, So I mean the scriptures are pretty clear that you know, the office of elder, bishop overseer, it is an office. There are qualifications for that office, which indicates that not everybody's supposed to be in the office. It does have authority and responsibility and accountability to God. And we are commanded to submit to those who are are in those offices. So yeah, I mean, you know, you can find people out there who argue against almost everything, you know, almost everything, and the gyrations that they go through are pretty similar, and ultimately they have to kind of undermine scripture, you know, kind of like what we talked about last night. I know, for thousands of years we've had this translation, but you know so but again that's that's it's jurisdiction. Where's the jurisdiction of that authority. The jurisdiction of that authority is in the church and the things pertaining to the church. Okay, let me go back here and then up here. Yeah, the question there is, you know, young people who come to church, their parents are not believers. Their their parents and their parents are not accepting the idea of of of baptism and of them becoming believers, so on and so forth. Submission to authority at every point always has the same limits. No one is alive to command what God forbids or forbid what God commands. No one is. No one is, So our submission to authority always has that check. Okay, no one can command me to do what God forbids me to do, and no one can forbid me to do what God commands me to do. And a great picture of that is found in Acts chapter four. Turn there now, by the way, before we go there, go to one Peter. First Peter, Chapter two. First Peter, Chapter two, and let's begin it verse thirteen. Okay, so you can understand this. Be subject, for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the Emperor as supreme or to governors as sent by him. To punish those who do evil, and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you shall put to silence the ignorance of the foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone, love the brotherhood, Fear God, honor the Emperor. Servants. Be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the unjust. For this is a gracious thing. When mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. Okay, and he goes on. We can go all the way through chapter three where he talks about suffering more. Okay, so that's Peter right now, Let's go to Acts chapter four, same guy, Peter and John Acts chapter four. Before the Sanhedrin, beginning of verse thirteen of Acts, chapter four. Now, when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated common men, they were astonished, and they reckoned they by the way of the Sanhedrin, a political slash religious authority in Jerusalem. Okay, they recognized they had been with Jesus, But seeing the man who was healed standing beside them, they had nothing to say in opposition. But when they had commanded them to leave the council, they conferred with one another, saying, what shall we do with these men? For that a notable sign had been performed through them is evident to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But in order that it may spread no further among the people, let us warn them to speak no more to anyone in this name. So they called them and charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. Peter says, submit to authority right, not just just, but even unjust right. But Peter and John answered them, whether it is right in the side of God to listen to you rather than God? You be the judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard. They said, no, Well wait a minute, he said, submit to authority. Yeah, but no authority can command what God forbids, or forbid what God commands, no authority, Yes, sir, proponents of federal membership. The question is, proponents of federal membership, where do they look to draw their arguments for federal membership? Really just all the passages of script passages of scripture that deal with the father and his headship in the home. And so you'd look at you know, Ephesians chapter five, and you know one Peter chapter three, Old Testament Passages Galore numbers thirty and Deuteronomy twenty two, and you know a bunch of other places that talk about a father and his headship and his responsibility. The Old Testament example of the father representing his family, his his clan, you know, before the elders. So that's that's where they that's where the idea comes from. Yeah. No, the question is passages like Cornelia I call him, you know, I call them the baptism passages. You know, these passages where a whole household is saved and they're they're baptized. Do they Is this where the federal membership people are going, Oh, that's where ifant baptism folks go. And I would argue that in not one of those instances is an infant mentioned, and not one of those instances. In every one of those instances, the Gospels preached the whole household believes. So the whole households baptized because they all believed. Okay, it didn't say because Cornelius believed. You know, his old household was baptized because this old household believed. But that's where infant baptism folks go. Not so much with federal membership folks. They tend to make a lot more of an Old Testament argument. Yes, yeah, the the question. The question is on comforting people, shifting people when a child dies before making a profession of faith. It's small u uh, infants, especially child small children, things like that, And I you know, I I don't, I don't. I don't know that that federal membership answers that any easier than non federal membership answers it, you know, or that uh Presbyterian understanding of covenant and membership answers it any better than a Baptistic understanding. Because the Presbyterians are not arguing that these kids are shaved necessarily through through their through their baptism, so that that's that's not where we find the answer to that question. And and I don't think I don't think either of those three positions would argue that because of their position that kids are infants are saying, for example, yes, I had argued that the activities things like that, Yeah, how do we draw lines with heads of household making determinations about what it is that their family is going to participate in and which ministries you know their family is going to participate in. Listen, jurisdictionally, jurisdictionally, as the church, okay, and and and and as the elders in the church, our jurisdiction for saying you need to be here begins and ends when the church is called to worship. So if it's not when we are gathering as a church to worship, then jurisdictionally, I don't have the authority to say, you know. So, for example, if you, as a father, are keeping your family away on the Lord's Day, jurisdictionally, we have the authority to discipline you for that. If you're keeping your family away from youth group. I got nothing because that's not biblical. Our authority does not extend to those extra biblical ministries and extra biblical expressions and so on and so forth. And you know, Wednesday night visitation or the other things. A bunch of stuff could be wonderful stuff. I mean, it could be absolutely wonderful stuff. But jurisdictionally, that's beyond the scope. You know, that's beyond the scope. So we a government in the Bible in conflict with each other. And take the example of Spain. You know, simple say is to switch one where it is still leading to spank your children. There's just one issue in the church you know would be appropriate and for in order to prescribe that, knowing it to get us build law. But that's what the files and prescribed for. And then just slightly different scenario. And if you have foster children, the state says you cannot do this while they're in this, say, are in this you know, period of time maybe before dog or something. Yeah. Yeah, that's that's two very separate issues. Let's deal with the first. There. The question is if the state passes laws that are in conflict with the Bible, then what do we do. Caesar cannot command what God forbids, or forbid what God commands. Now we need to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. But there's a process. We we have to appeal to authority. Okay, that's where we start. We make we make appeals to authority. And then after we've made our appeals to authority, sometimes it's time for us to defy authority. But we don't just run straight to defiance. We try to make our appeal to authority, and sometimes our defiance is overt, and sometimes our defiance is covert. Perfect example is home education. One of the reasons that home education is legal in all fifty states is because of Christian parents who you know, covertly worked, made appeals with held their children, you know, from government educating, educated them at home, and all the while fought tooth and nail to gain that right that could not legitimately be taken away. So that's the first part of quesse. The second part of your question is if you're in the foster care system, and the foster care system says that you know you can't spank your children because you're in false care. You signed a contract you must let your yes b yes, and your no be no. So if you don't want to live under those regulations, don't go to foster care. But if you do, you're obligated to let your yes bs and your no be no. There's an amendment provision in the Bible. What do you mean? Right? Like, what did you know? I missed that one man after lunch bro a little slow right now? Yeah, no, no, no, there's all Yeah, there's a second amendment provision in the Bible. Yeah, yeah, big time. Yeah, several lots of them, you know, yeah, yeah, yeah. Jesus said, if you don't have a sword, go sell your cloak and buy one. Get you a gun man, you know, all right? All right, yes, yes. In other cultures, the very patriarchal, and if you have a whole tribe that follows the head tribe man, and then you're trying to plan the church there, I'm just trying to figure out how would this work for that culture. I mean, if this is the way churches, I agree, individual membership, but in a culture that it is more ingrained in there than it is here, how would we work that out? Within the question is what happens when we go to cultures that are more patriarchal or makeriarchal for that matter. And there are leadership structures within the culture that would kind of war against this idea of individual membership. Same thing as a culture that practices polygamy or animal sacrifices or fill in the blank. You know, when the Gospel penetrates a culture, it is not incumbent upon the Gospel. To bend to the culture is not That's not what we do. That's not who we are. We go baptize them in the name of the Father, Son, the Holy Spirit, and then figure out how to adapt to the way that their culture. No, teach them to observe all things that I've commanded you everything that's beyond everything okay, No, yeah, that are rolling and those things need to be challenged at every point, you see. So we don't promote a Christianity that says, when you come into this building, here's what holiness looks like. But when you go outside there the standards are defined by the culture. We can't do that. We must not do that, which is why the Gospel has transformed the areas of the world where it's taken root. I mean, whole cultures have been transformed by the Gospel, because you don't just go in and kind of adapt and let whatever you know tends to be dominant in that area stay dominant in that area. And this is why there's certain perversions of the Gospel that are popular in some parts of the world as opposed to others. You know. So you go into a culture where you know animism. You know that these animistic cultures the spirits of the ancestors, appeasing the spirits, the strong man, medicine man, so on and so forth. Well, you come into that culture with word of faith, theology and their life. Sweet I get to be the strong man. It's a perversion, you see, and it kind of adapts to the culture, and the culture can continue to be as unbiblical and ungodly, you know, as it was from the get go. And those are the hardest places in the world to penetrate with the Gospel. People who've had this perverted picture of the Gospel come in and accommodate to their culture. So no, no, no, no, we don't want to do that. We don't want to do that. We want to teach them to observe all things that the Lord has taught us. It impacts every aspect of our lives, and unless those things in their culture happened to be biblical. Because there are cultures all over the world that have been influenced by the scriptures, even places that you would go now, you know, where we'd say, you know, this place hasn't been penetrated by the Gospel, this place never had, doesn't have the Scripture in their language. You can go and find things that are just eerily similar to biblical culture. Well, there are a lot of reasons for that, you know. Part of that is the image of God, you know, and men. Part of that also is because there are a lot of places that have been touched by the gospel, hadn't taken root, hadn't taken hold. You know, you look at them now and it seems like they've got nothing and they've never had anything. But there are some places that have been influenced by that truth. So, but no, we don't been, we don't bend, we don't been to culture. You know, we don't been to culture. And unfortunately that's just going on right now in the emergent movement. You know, you've been to culture, and what happens you begin to look just like the culture and eventually you've got nothing to offer to the culture. Why do I want to come here when I can kind of stay out there because y'all are trying to be like what we are and except is real for us and not for you. Well, other questions jurisdictions and the difficulties that we face with jurisdictions, membership, families. But ask me, I'm gonna start making up questions. You probably grew very questions about the family. Did you do over age? How did you see seen all ind or you say uh struct yeah, yeah, But when the issues of the church last, yeah, right, how do you clearly up why I want to say try to cebate when I say basically even the church. Yeah. The question is on the the language of of family families, which by the way, goes back to the Puritans that the church is the smallest unit that we can find in the church is family units. Everybody belongs to a family unit. Most people who come to faith come to faith because of a family unit. It's rare, indeed to find people who are first generation Christians. I mean, it really is rare. It's becoming more and more common, unfortunately, but it's rare indeed to find people who are first generation Christians. And the reason that we use that family of family language. We're talking about structure, not the nature of the church or you talk about ontologically. You know what the church is. No, what we believe about the nature of the church is what I read from you from the Confession that our church is made up of believers. But when we talk about structurally, I think it's hugely important. And here's why, because the Bible very clearly gives instruction about discipleship and other issues that are directed to and through families. Ephesians chapter five, for example, Deuteronomy six, which Ephesian chapter five is pointing back to you know what do we see there? Children will be your parents and the Lord. For this is right, aren't your father and your mother? It's the first commandment with the promise, and they well go well with you, and you may live long in the land. Fathers do not provoke a children angry, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. Fathers have an obligation to watch their wives with the water of the Word. And so ultimately, when we talk about ongoing day to day discipleship, how can we not acknowledge that as a church, we've been told very specifically. We've been given nothing about a Sunday school class or Sunday school departments or you know, the youth ministry, or we've been given nothing about that. As far as the ongoing day to day discipleship for people, nothing, But we've been given very specific instructions the ongoing day to day discipleship that happens in these little units called households. Okay, first time of the chapter five is another one. First time of the chapter five instructs the church on taking care of widows. Now, if the smallest unit in the church is the individual, then you would expect Paul to say, hey, man, when there's a widow, take care of the widow. That's not what he says. Let's look at first time of the chapter five, so we know that the household is the smallest teaching unit in the church. By the way, we also associate that in Titus. But before we let me read this to you from Titus chapter one. Titus one to nine says, talking about the elder, he must hold firm to the trustworthy word is taught, so that he may be able to give instruction and sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradicted four. There are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party. They must be silent since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach. Silence them because they're upsetting whole families. Okay, the acknowledgement of households. But now, in First Timothy chapter five, when we're dealing with widows, beginning verse three, honor widows who are truly widows. But if a widow has children and grandchildren, let them first learn to show godliness to their own household, and to make some return to their parents. For this is pleasing in the sight of God. She who is truly a widow left all alone, has set her a hope on God. It continues in supplications and prayers night and day. But she who is self indulged and indulged, is dead even while she lives. Command these things as well, so that they may be without reproach. But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for the members of his household, he has denied the faith the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. What was the Bible saying the church's first responsibility is when it's faced with a widow in need, check the family, that's the smallest unit. Teach the family how to take care of its widows. It does not say treat everybody like an individual and ignore the family. It says, the first place you go is to her children, and teach her children their responsibility to take care of their widowed mother. By the way, one Timothy five to eight, a man who doesn't take care of his own relatives has denied the faith is worse than an unbeliever. That's not a man who's not taking care of his wife. That's a man who's not taking care of his widowed mother. So, I mean, scriptures just absolutely clear about familiar responsibilities and about the church's duty in instructing in those familiar responsibilities. Titus chapter two. Older women are are are to you know, are to are to be I'm just completely drawn jona blank no no no, no, no no no no, before that, before that that that's five. But but before that, older women are to be sober minded. That's why I couldn't get out of my mind. Sober minded, dignified, self control, sound and faith and love and insteadfastness. Older men are older women likewise are to be reverent and behavior, not slenders or slaves so much wine. They are to teach what is good and so trained the young women to what love their husbands and children, be self controlled, pure, working at home kind, submissive to their own husbands. What's that are we? Oh? Wow? Okay? So again what does that point to? It points to the household. So now we got Titus two ministry. This is a great irony. You know what is tightest two ministry? Up? Tightest two ministries where the women can all get together and you know, do what do what swhere? Older women point younger women to their duties and responsibilities in their homes. By the way, for those who like to run to Titus two and argue for youth ministry, Titus two is about older women teaching younger women who are of marriageable age, not girls, to be submissive to their own husbands. That's not youth ministry. It's not girls. It's women. Okay, that's women who have families. Right. So anyway, all of this stuff points in that same direction. So when we talk about the church as a family of families and the structural issues there. What we're trying to acknowledge is this body of New Testament texts that make it very clear that there is a duty and responsibility of those who lead the church to teach those within the church how to function within the context and confines of that most familiar of all jurisdictions. Because everybody is part of a family. Everybody is Even if you've got a bad family, you're a strange from your family, you still came from that family and you're part of a family or part of a household somewhere, and so that's where we exercise our godliness more consistently than anywhere else. So that's where we pass on the faith to the next generation. Next generation is not under the authority of the church, yet that's where we exercise the piety between husband and wife, which is that daily, ongoing picture of the relationship between Christ and his church. It's just absolutely undeniable. Thank you for watching the twenty twelve Simple refermant of conference. For more resources about church membership or information on future conferences, please visit www dot Grace Family Baptist dot net.