My accuser returned (<--click to get the full quote) and left the blockquoted comments below (not the quoted Scriptures, though):

David, I find your interaction here evasive, dismissive, and inexcusable. It's time for some accountability.

Josh, I do not want to debate.

Really? Then why the accusatory and provocative comments in response to my prayer?

For me there is nothing to debate.

Sure there is. Substantiating your accusations against me.

What I said I have said.

And poorly so, I might add.

I do not regret what I said about your prayer!

Who asked you to regret it? I just asked you to back up your assertions.

If you wish to parade about like a Pharisee then I can’t stop you.

And herein is what you have fundamentally failed to prove. It is time for you to demonstrate how I have “parade[d] about like a Pharisee.” Do you realize how pompous, arrogant, and Pharisaical your statement is? Do you even know the definition of Pharisaical? It means to be hypocritical and cherish self-righteousness. Which, no doubt, I have harbored in this wretched heart of mine at one time or another. So have you. So has any other man born of woman (excepting Christ, of course).

Nonetheless, you have accused me of “parad[ing] about like a Pharisee,” yet unable to point to anything in that prayer which substantiates such a claim. Since you are so intent upon labeling my prayer as that of a Pharisee, let’s consider the parable about the prayer of a Pharisee and that of a tax collector: From Luke 18:9-14 Jesus (Hey, sorry it’s not the esteemed Apostle you’re so enamored with) introduces the story:

9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus:”

Now check out the prayer of this Pharisee:

‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’

So, David, read the Pharisee’s prayer then go back and re-read the prayer to which you so pompously responded. Let’s see, in my prayer is mentioned my:

-failures
-brokenness
-guilt
-sin
-need for sanctification
-need for repentance
-need for God’s mercies
-need for God’s forgiveness
-dependence on Christ’s merit alone.

Next, David, consider the prayer of the Tax Collector (Read: a sinner, the opposite of, and enemy to the Pharisee):

13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’

Now, David, consider my prayer again. Compare it to the Pharisee’s prayer, then to the Tax Collector’s. Which does my prayer most resemble? Furthermore, what was the difference between the Pharisee and the Tax Collector? Nothing! Both were wretched, vile, and depraved sinners. The only difference was the grace of God in the Tax Collector’s life to bring him to the recognition of his sin.

David, nowwhere in my prayer did I thank God that I was “not like other men.” Nowhere did I brag about foolish works of religion of the flesh. Why? Because the greatest of my righteousness is but filthy rags in God’s sight. I dare not appeal to any merit (so-called) of my own for His Divine favor. I cling to Christ alone.

I have appealed to Scripture and plain reason in my responses to you. The very Confession to which you supposedly subscribe as Cavinistic Methodist (specifically number 30) affirms my thoughts on the Law of God. I didn’t initate this. You did. I didn’t make sweeping, arrogant, and Pharisaical accusations. You came to my blog and made them. So back them up with something more than assertions or recant. Or…run away like a spineless jellyfish. But don’t lie to, evade, or dismiss me. You owe me accountability.

I write this for your own good. If you don’t either prove your assertion or recant, your integrity and credibility is called into question in front of me, God, and those who visit my blog. They know where your website (http://holyfear.net) is. Then your website loses credibility. They know with whom you fellowship (Calvinistic Methodists). They know where you go to church (Cardiff Tabernacle). They can see who your pastors are. Do you really want your careless epithets directed at me reflecting on their character? More so, David, they know the Name of the God Whom you profess. Do you want your carelessness reflecting upon Him? I should hope not.

Have you read your own denomination’s Confession of faith? If so, have you accused your elders and church denominational leaders of being Pharisees or living under the Law and not enough in the Holy Spirit? Tread carefully, Brother. Think before you make accusations you can’t substantiate. You called me out publicly, thus I do the same. In fact, I’m not so sure your church leadership doesn’t need to know about the false charges you’ve brought against me.

However, if you will either 1) adequately prove your accusations by demonstrating how I’m guilty of what you’ve charged, or 2) recant, all will be well. My blog and everything I write is done under the oversight of my Church and Elders. I am confident that I’m not beyond the bounds of our confession, which is derived from the Scriptures. You can contact them at anytime if you think I am. One way or the other you need to be held accountable for your sloppy accusations.

Write a book about this episode in your life why don’t you Josh. One day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. If I seem not to be responding as you wish Josh, forgive me, it’s just that I view time in that way. I have to go, will try to pass by soon. David

Make sure you do.

Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?

A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

O, God, in Your mercy forgive my sore neglect of Your provision! I am reminded of the frailty in which this sin-wrought body will remain until my sanctification is consumated. I am reminded of my own selfishness. I have paraded in frivolous pursuits and engaged in trivial matters. It is not that these things, O Lord, were inherently evil. No, it is my propensity toward neglect of Your graces. My enemy, this world, calls me away with sweet whispers and paws of velvet. Then as I approach a seemingly harmless circumstance the sharp claws tear through the velvet bloodying me anew.

I am but a frame of weightless matter and settle like dust before You. Forgive my neglect of wholeheartedly pursuing man’s chief end. Instead I have thought only of me: A wife. A family. Finishing my “education.” At what cost, Josh? Have I really been so foolish to think I can be an expounder of God’s Holy Word by making idols of the very means which bring me there and from the fruits resulting therein?! May it never be, Lord. Thank You for Your providential reminders to Your children of our great and incessant need of simplicity in Christ.

Forgive my failures and poor handling of Your Word. Forgive my selfishness. Strip away my pride. Break my stubbornness. Weeping lasts for the night, but joy comes in the morning. Resolve me O Lord to glorify Your Name and enjoy You, I pray in Christ’s Name and the merit which He purchased on my behalf. Amen.

Recently, it has been asserted that I am living too much “under the Law.” But the assertion does not cease there. Pitted against me living too much “under the Law” was the presumption that I was not living enough “in the Holy Spirit.” Now all of this was, to be honest, confounding and news to me. How one who does not know me could, with any intellectual honesty whatsoever, impute such sentiments to my state of being left me with only two logical possibilities.

Either:

1. Said person has obviously not taken the time to read even just a small portion of my blog entries of substance, thus appreciating the greater context in which I discuss God’s Law.

Or:

2. Said person has textual evidence from my own hand (keyboard) by which he could expose and indict me, proving such allegations to be, in fact, true.

Since no evidence was laid forth, I suppose I will opt for the first. It is apparent that whilst I have put many an emphases in my blog concerning God’s Law, portions in which I have discussed the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, the Gospel of Grace’s saving power, et al have been selectively passed over. However, before addressing the neglect of my accuser in considering the exhaustive context of my writings, let us briefly examine a role/some roles in which God’s Law ought to act in the life of a believer. I feel this is necessary because I believe that said person’s allegations stem from a misunderstanding of what it means to be “under the Law.” Respectfully, though I believe his intentions positive, I fear he has fallen prey to the idea that those of us who are under grace can only be out from “under the Law” by casting it aside. Such a belief is unfounded in Scripture and, I believe, a revolt against God’s provision of goodness He has given us in the Law.

First, what does God’s Word say about God’s Law? Many things. My personal favorite follows thus from Psalm 19:

7 The law of the Lord is perfect, reviving the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; the rules of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold;sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned; in keeping them there is great reward.

I am certain that Biblical Christians would all agree that we can trust Scripture, no? Not only can we trust in Scripture, we can love and obey it wholeheartedly, without fear of it leading us astray. Thus, it follows we can also believe in and trust what the Psalmist says here. Let us consider a few of the Psalmist’s descriptors of the Law.

1. God’s Law is Perfect (v.7)

Hebrew: תמים –Transliteration: tamiym — which means:

1) complete, whole, entire, sound
a) complete, whole, entire
b) whole, sound, healthful
c) complete, entire (of time)
d) sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
e) what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact

Accidental is certainly no way to characterize the Psalmist’s placing of perfect as the first descriptor of God’s Law in this passage. Rather, it lays the foundation for all those which proceed thereafter. Because God’s Law is perfect, we can be confident that to the “revived soul” it:

-is sure, bringing wisdom to the simple
-is right, rejoicing the heart
-is pure, enlightening the eyes

So not only is the Law all these perfect things, but it does and brings good things! Wisdom, Joy, Illumination, and Rewards. That doesn’t sound scary, nor is it something I mind living “under.” Now, considering the given definition of perfect, I believe we are safe to proclaim that God’s Law is perpetual. If it is perfect (and it is), how could one even imply that it is bad, deficient, or whatever one wishes to say, enough that we need to be finished with it? I mean, it is complete, not lacking in anything, sound, etc., thus it has no need to be abolished. Next, allow me to quote that Esteemed Apostle, when he writes:

So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. - Romans 7:12

Having briefly touched the surface, let me say that I, in no way, think my accuser would disagree thus far with what I’ve said. “So, then, what is the purpose, Josh?” To point out that when the Apostle says “you are not under law but under grace,” he does not mean that the Law is bad, or that it is no longer in effect. Granted, there are certain Mosaic, Ceremonial, and Judicial laws which are no longer in effect, but not without reason. Those very things no longer have any typological use, having been fulfilled in Christ. No, what I speak of is God’s Moral Law.

What was Paul saying, then? The same thing that is true for every believer in all times in all ages ranging from Adam to present. That, before God so graciously regenerated and justifies a sinner, he is condemned by the Law. Not because the Law is in any way deficient. NO! Because men are deficient. The Law stands as a condemnation against those who have not been saved by the Law Giver. However, once the sinner is graciously brought into the Law Giver’s family, he is no longer condemned by that Law, but saved by the Law Giver’s grace.

Therefore, since it is nothing inherent within the Law that is condemnable, deficient, etc. Paul does not mean that the Law is no longer authoritative, binding, or  important for the Christian. We know that the Law is perfect, good, holy, just, rewarding, etc. How, then, could we say it is abolished? The Law, for the unbeliever, serves one of two purposes: Either, his condemnation unto everlasting hell, or his conviction unto repentance, conversion and everlasting glory.

For the Christian, though, the Law is still authoritative, binding, and important. It cannot condemn the Christian, for there is now no condemnation for those in Christ. Why is that? Because Christ took the condemnation, not because of some magical pixie dust that is applied to believers when they are converted. The Law is a measure for the Christian. The Law ought to be a delight for the Christian. The Law serves as a means unto holiness (not perfectionism, mind you). Thus, it is not the Law that is bad, but men. The Law is not a Boogey-Man.

So, as I have said before time and again here, man is justified by grace alone (sola gratia) through faith alone (sola fide) in Christ alone (soli Christo) according to Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) to the glory of God alone (soli Deo gloria). Sinners are not, I repeat, are not salvifically justified by the Law. Thus, in light of what I have written concerning justification and man’s salvation, the burden of proof is on my accuser to show wherein I have asserted any sentiment that I am living under the Law, or that I think such is somehow right, and that I am not living enough “in the Holy Spirit.”  

Well, I certainly encourage you to order your copy today of the Gunn Productions’ The Monstrous Regiment of Women. So long as you buy this gem before October 15th, you’ll get free shipping, and the shipping is fast! This doucmentary was a welcome addition to my very small DVD collection (I’m more into books ;)), and I want to point you to a good friend of mine’s review on The Monstrous Regiment, as I think she captures well the substance of the film.

I also want to say “Thanks” to all those folks at Gunn Productions for bringing this issue to the forefront, as the subject matter therein needs to be heard not only by those outside the Church, but many inside as well. Feminism has perniciously crept its way into the hearts and minds of women throughout our culture. Why? Well, ultimately, in my opinion, I think it’s due to the Men abdicating their roles as Protectors.

To any at Gunn Productions, in case you read this, I’m not sure what other plans you have for documentaries, etc., but I just wanted to suggest a few topics that I believe would be invaluable contributions to Christ’s Church:

1. Covenantal Headship/Responsibility of the Man(This would be a great companion to The Monstrous Regiment due to subject matter)

2. A More Specific and Exhaustive Look at Abortion

Thanks again to Gunn Productions for making this available.