The black robed regiment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the link Im downloading it right now. Does anyone know if Pastor Weaver has a church or does he travel around to preach?
 
methinks that the men of the 'black robed regiment' would have a dificult time finding a church to pastor in todays society. I'd say they're interpretation of Rom.13 varies a good bit from what is being taught today.
 
Blueridge Believer said:
methinks that the men of the 'black robed regiment' would have a dificult time finding a church to pastor in todays society. I'd say they're interpretation of Rom.13 varies a good bit from what is being taught today.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I must agree. The modern interpretation of Romans 13 does not, for the most part, have anything to do with biblical thinking.

Theognome
 
I guess I'll have to be the party-pooper on this one, and say:

1. This is a classic example of using a text as a springboard into a sermon that basically has nothing to do with that passage in context. He could have easily used a handful of other passages of Scripture to preach the same sermon.

2. Noting especially that this particular passage is found in a NT epistle that uniquely magnifies the person and work of Christ I must then ask - where was the Gospel, or Christ in all of this?

3. I would like to think that it was Christ who has purchased my independence, and not a handful of black robed men...

The Gospel is about creating a spiritual revolution unto a heavenly kingdom, rather than a civil revolution for an earthly kingdom. I would hate to come to the realization late in life that I had wasted my ministerial labors on the latter when I should have been making eternal gains for the former.
 
Archlute said:
I guess I'll have to be the party-pooper on this one, and say:

1. This is a classic example of using a text as a springboard into a sermon that basically has nothing to do with that passage in context. He could have easily used a handful of other passages of Scripture to preach the same sermon.

2. Noting especially that this particular passage is found in a NT epistle that uniquely magnifies the person and work of Christ I must then ask - where was the Gospel, or Christ in all of this?

3. I would like to think that it was Christ who has purchased my independence, and not a handful of black robed men...

The Gospel is about creating a spiritual revolution unto a heavenly kingdom, rather than a civil revolution for an earthly kingdom. I would hate to come to the realization late in life that I had wasted my ministerial labors on the latter when I should have been making eternal gains for the former.
Click to expand...

So the "blacked robed regiment" wasted their lives?

I missed the part where Pastor Weaver claimed that Christ did not purchase independence for His people.

What is wrong with a pastor applying Scripture to the civil realm? Does not Scripture address these issues as well? It sounds like you are arguing for an overly narrow view of what the Bible teaches.
 
brianeschen said:
So the "blacked robed regiment" wasted their lives?

I missed the part where Pastor Weaver claimed that Christ did not purchase independence for His people.

What is wrong with a pastor applying Scripture to the civil realm? Does not Scripture address these issues as well? It sounds like you are arguing for an overly narrow view of what the Bible teaches.
Click to expand...

1. An evaluation of the ministerial labors of these men is beside the point. The problem is that the fellow who put together this "sermon" is failing to do what is required by the Christian ministry, namely, to preach Christ and him crucified. The labors of well intentioned ministers of the past are not the gospel, nor are they the proper subject of any Christian sermon (a lecture possibly), and should not occupy the minister's time in the pulpit. It is possible to refer to something like that by way of a supporting illustration, but to make it the sole subject of a 68 min. sermon is being beyond irresponsible to those who would come and hear of the things of Scripture and eternal life.

2. He didn't mention anything about what Christ did or did not do, which is the problem. He explicitly mentioned that it was these men who "purchased our freedom". This is a confusing of the true spiritual freedom purchased by Christ for his people, and a temporary civil freedom that may or may not have been assisted by ministers applying themselves to activities in the civil realm. You came away from that lecture believing that civil liberty was the sole most important thing for which a man could possibly give up his life.

3. There is no problem with a minister applying the Gospel and the admonitions of Scripture to our understanding of the civil realm. However, this fellow did no such thing as his entire sermon was basically attempting to create fan-boy applause for the civil labors of some ministers who took that route. It was a piece that spent its time in adulation of these men, and did not actually apply Scripture to conscience of the Christian regarding the civil realm. His thundering on about "truth" and such was done in a very general manner, and did not ever get to the point of telling us exactly what that truth was, and why it was so important. Truth for truth's sake is neither specifically Christian, nor does it have the power to save and change lives. You can probably find Imams thundering on about the same thing from time to time.

Seminary training at a good, Christ-centered and Reformed institution is very important, and this sermon is yet another example of what can happen when that preparatory step is neglected.
 
Archlute said:
brianeschen said:
So the "blacked robed regiment" wasted their lives?

I missed the part where Pastor Weaver claimed that Christ did not purchase independence for His people.

What is wrong with a pastor applying Scripture to the civil realm? Does not Scripture address these issues as well? It sounds like you are arguing for an overly narrow view of what the Bible teaches.
Click to expand...

1. An evaluation of the ministerial labors of these men is beside the point. The problem is that the fellow who put together this "sermon" is failing to do what is required by the Christian ministry, namely, to preach Christ and him crucified. The labors of well intentioned ministers of the past are not the gospel, nor are they the proper subject of any Christian sermon (a lecture possibly), and should not occupy the minister's time in the pulpit. It is possible to refer to something like that by way of a supporting illustration, but to make it the sole subject of a 68 min. sermon is being beyond irresponsible to those who would come and hear of the things of Scripture and eternal life.

2. He didn't mention anything about what Christ did or did not do, which is the problem. He explicitly mentioned that it was these men who "purchased our freedom". This is a confusing of the true spiritual freedom purchased by Christ for his people, and a temporary civil freedom that may or may not have been assisted by ministers applying themselves to activities in the civil realm. You came away from that lecture believing that civil liberty was the sole most important thing for which a man could possibly give up his life.

3. There is no problem with a minister applying the Gospel and the admonitions of Scripture to our understanding of the civil realm. However, this fellow did no such thing as his entire sermon was basically attempting to create fan-boy applause for the civil labors of some ministers who took that route. It was a piece that spent its time in adulation of these men, and did not actually apply Scripture to conscience of the Christian regarding the civil realm. His thundering on about "truth" and such was done in a very general manner, and did not ever get to the point of telling us exactly what that truth was, and why it was so important. Truth for truth's sake is neither specifically Christian, nor does it have the power to save and change lives. You can probably find Imams thundering on about the same thing from time to time.

Seminary training at a good, Christ-centered and Reformed institution is very important, and this sermon is yet another example of what can happen when that preparatory step is neglected.
Click to expand...

I believe the Pastor was speaking at a "historical theological conference". I did not think it to be a Lords day sermon.

-----Added 2/25/2009 at 10:21:18 EST-----

John Weaver preaches on The Black-Robed Regiment, telling the stories of early American pastors who fought in the first war for American Independence. This was part of a series of special meetings attended by members of Christian Exodus at the South Pointe Baptist Church in Pelzer, South Carolina 3/2007
Click to expand...

In the first 15 seconds , the Pastor references that he is speaking at a conference.

Here is the [ame="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7139578266175506519"]video[/ame]
 
Are you sure that you are referencing the same thing? What I listened to was listed as a sermon, and preached in the manner of a sermon, on sermonaudio.com. I am not going to take the time to listen to it twice, but I did not hear any mention made in that recording of this being part of a lecture series. If it were a lecture, it was certainly not delivered as one.

As well, I still would find fault in the manner in which Holy Writ was inappropriately used to justify patriotic rabble-rousing. The Word of God is not for that sort of propaganda, but for the redemption and sanctification of men and women.

Seeing that he has linked to that sermon others with titles such as "Why the South Must Rise Again" should give one pause before trying to defend this sort of thing as being Christian preaching.
 
Archlute said:
Are you sure that you are referencing the same thing? What I listened to was listed as a sermon, and preached in the manner of a sermon, on sermonaudio.com. I am not going to take the time to listen to it twice, but I did not hear any mention made in that recording of this being part of a lecture series. If it were a lecture, it was certainly not delivered as one.
Click to expand...

You can either listen to the first 20 seconds or take my word for it. I am sure that I am referencing the same lecture. Not everything on sermon audio is a sermon. When Pastors lecture from week to week, its recorded and put on sermon audio.

The blacked robed regiment is part 9 in a series of lectures.
 
Archlute said:
Are you sure that you are referencing the same thing? What I listened to was listed as a sermon, and preached in the manner of a sermon, on sermonaudio.com. I am not going to take the time to listen to it twice, but I did not hear any mention made in that recording of this being part of a lecture series. If it were a lecture, it was certainly not delivered as one.

As well, I still would find fault in the manner in which Holy Writ was inappropriately used to justify patriotic rabble-rousing. The Word of God is not for that sort of propaganda, but for the redemption and sanctification of men and women.

Seeing that he has linked to that sermon others with titles such as "Why the South Must Rise Again" should give one pause before trying to defend this sort of thing as being Christian preaching.
Click to expand...

Did not the author of Hebrews (in the middle of a book to explain the preeminence of Christ) take time to recount what our forefathers had accomplished by faith? Is this patriotic rabble-rousing . . . propaganda? Does not the cloud of witnesses who have gone before encourage us to press on in our sanctification? What is wrong with telling of God's mighty deeds in history?

Just because you don't like the other titles of his sermons does not mean that he is wrong. We as a people have largely forgotten our God wrought heritage and then when a man tries to cure our amnesia he is not preaching enough of the gospel. He has 333 "sermons" listed (as noted earlier, they are not all on the Lord's day but some are lectures) and next to the top is a series on the doctrine of election from Ephesians (6 part).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top