Return to Main Page
Site Index

Trouble with drop box click here for help     Printing Instructions for Articles
Back to Index to Gillespie Discussion

Discussion of George Gillespie's Wholesome Severity Reconciled with Christian Liberty
Re: WF: GWS-2 Questions for thought 
Subject: Re: WF: GWS-2 Questions for thought
From: Tom Brewer 
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:26:00 -0500

Richard Bacon wrote:
> 
> When GG says that the magistrate has a responsibility to
> both tables of the law, he is clearly referring to the first
> four commandments as opposed to the last six, or "our relation
> toward God."  He says that the magistrate ought to preserve
> Christ's ordinances from "violation."  What kinds of violation
> might we expect he is talking about?

This first paragraph alone is enough for tons of discussion.

Very quickly, I throw into the ring what I think should be obvious to
all, and that is GG would definitley have the Sabbath in mind. Should
the magistrate be responsible for assuring that all within his
jurisdiction are "observing" the Sabbath in such a way as to remember it
and keep it holy? Can there be liberty of conscience on Sabbath
observance or is the Sabbath ordered around strict commands and
regulations? What kinds of violations would the magistrate be
responsible to oppose? Will the magistrate be responsible for violations
of conscience? If the magistrate learns of a constituent's lustful
desires to forget the Sabbath observance, is the magistrate respnsible
to oppose those unlawful desires, or must he wait until the constituent
has executed those desires by an outward show of willful disregard for
the Sabbath?

Just a few thoughts....

Tom Brewer