Home > theology > Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed

Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed

Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed.

The gospel of grace is entirely incompatible with a preening, self-promoting ministry.  Paul knew his sin – he was “the chief of sinners.”  He also knew the grace by which he had been saved.  That is why he conducted himself in so lowly a fashion.  He believed in pastoral authority – that much is clear – but he chose to work without the wages he deserved, to live without the wife he might have taken, to be insulted, beaten, chained, and ultimately killed.  He believed in pastoral authority, but he sought to exercise that authority with something of the grace and mercy which the Anointed of God had shown to him.

 

What a foul disservice we do to the Word of God, then, if we go back to the Old Covenant and grab a verse about the Anointed of God and use it to set ourselves up with the very pomp which Christ and His Apostles rejected!

Advertisements
Categories: theology
  1. Hugh McCann
    September 28, 2013 at 8:59 am

    who[m]?
    what?
    where?
    why?

    Like

    • September 28, 2013 at 9:18 am

      it doesn’t matter

      Like

      • Hugh McCann
        September 28, 2013 at 9:23 am

        it does, actually;
        a pious-sounding quote out of context doesn’t make much sense.
        of whom was the author talking? and why?

        Like

  2. Hugh McCann
    September 28, 2013 at 9:04 am

    st thomas (chantry)
    defending false prophets
    at his blog
    b/c of charismatix in neo-calvinism

    thanks for link!
    (context helps!)

    Like

    • September 28, 2013 at 9:20 am

      What on earth are you talking about Hugh? Be slow to speak

      Like

      • Hugh McCann
        September 28, 2013 at 9:24 am

        I’m giving the answers for which I sought. that’s all.
        you failed to give them in your post, so I appreciate your posting the link.
        it’d all be too cryptic, otherwise! 🙂

        Like

        • September 28, 2013 at 9:27 am

          And your answer is that chantry is defending false prophets in the post?

          Like

  3. Hugh McCann
    September 28, 2013 at 9:44 am

    Nay – not in the least. I’d asked & answered:

    who[m]? st thomas (chantry)

    what? defending false prophets (he’s writing ABOUT such)

    where? at his blog

    why? b/c of charismatix in neo-calvinism

    Sorry – *I* was too cryptic!

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: