"Or Tattoo Yourselves..."

 "I want to get a tattoo of..." 

Even if these words have not come out of your own mouth, you have likely heard them from a child, a spouse, a friend, or someone else close to you. At various times in my life, I myself have considered getting a tattoo. But how should Christians think about getting a tattoo? All Bible-believing Christians agree that there are specific decisions about what we do with our own bodies that are clearly contrary to Scripture (decisions such as engaging in drunkenness, or committing suicide) and specific decisions about what we do with our own bodies that are a matter of mere personal preference (decisions such as wearing a specific color or style of clothing, or eating specific cuisine). However, Bible-believing Christians differ as to whether getting a tattoo should normally be seen as entirely in the 'mere personal preference' category, or if there are reasons Christians should normally refrain from getting tattoos. Christians should refrain from getting tattoos for at least three reasons: to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance, to honor God as the definer of our individuality, and to honor God as the giver of our health.

The first reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance. Before birth, God fashioned each child's physical body in the womb (Psa 139:13; Job 10:8; 31:15; Isa 49:1). David confesses, "I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well" (Psa 139:14). As a graffiti artist spray-painting pictures or words on the Venus de Milo or Michaelangelo's David would be an affront to the sculptors of those works, so the tattoo artist placing permanent pictures or words into our flesh does not enhance but detracts from the work of our creator. 

The second reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the definer of our individuality. If confronted with the question, "Who has the right to define who you are as a person?" many people in American or European nations today would answer: "I do." As part of its worldview, Western civilization has increasingly embraced the concept of "expressive individualism," which Carl Trueman defines as:

the belief that each person must act based on expressing his or her core feelings and intuition, and in so doing they become “authentic,” or, to put it another way, they become really themselves.

The expression of feelings and intuitions, permanently etched into the skin, is one way that people strive for authentic self-identification, signaling personal values to whoever sees the tattoos. However, Christians should recognize that our individuality should not be a matter of self-chosen images or slogans tattooed on the body, but a matter living out our Christian calling in light of the specific spiritual gifts God has given us (Rom 12:3-8; 1 Cor 12:4-30) and the specific circumstances in which God has providentially placed us. A myriad of New Testament verses speak of Christian identity, telling us (to give just a few examples) how we are a "new creation" (2 Cor 5:17), "God's handiwork" (Eph 1:7), and "temples of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor 6:19-20). We do not have to create an identity for ourselves. And when Jesus teaches about how we are to express our identity to others, He does not say, "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you get a tattoo," but, "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" (John 13:35). God is the definer of our individuality, and His Word gives us principles on how to best express our individuality.

The third reason that Christians should refrain from getting tattoos is to honor God as the giver of our health. There are health risks associated with getting tattoos. The Mayo Clinic warns that tattoos may cause allergic reactions, reactions to MRIs, diseases spread through the blood, skin infections, and other skin problems. An article published by the National Institutes of Health indicates that "tattoo ink induces inflammation in the draining lymph node and alters the immune response to vaccination." There is some research indicating that tattoos may be linked to cancer. In light of the health risks associated with tattoos, both proven risks and potential risks, wisdom would indicate that we should not get a tattoo, thus unnecessarily risking detriment to the health that God has given us.

Some people believe that tattoos are just a matter of taste, and no more of a moral issue than eating different flavors of ice cream. However, there are no Bible verses that prohibit eating certain ice cream flavors, whereas Leviticus 19:28 says, "You shall not make any cuts on your body for the dead or tattoo yourselves: I am the LORD." Though this Old Testament verse is not legally binding on Christians, it is still Scripture, and as "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim 3:16-17), Leviticus 19:28 should inform Christian sensibilities. Though tattoos today are not associated with a specific pagan religion, as they were during Old Testament times, they are associated with an expressive individualism that may be similar to pagan religions in terms of reorienting identity and allegiance around contra-biblical values. At the very least, the fact that the only reference to tattoos in Scripture is a negative statement should give Christians pause when considering whether to get a tattoo.

There are Christians who argue that they are getting a tattoo not just as an expression of self-chosen identity, but for the glory of God. They may plan to get a tattoo of a Bible verse or phrase from a hymn, etc. However, God does not only tell us to glorify Him to others; He also tells us how to go about glorifying Him to others. In 1 Timothy 2:9-10, Paul writes:

likewise [I teach] also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

1 Peter 3:3-4 says,

Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.

The way to glorify God is not through external adornments: through elaborate clothing, hairstyle, jewelry, nor (by application of the principle here) through tattoos. Rather, we should glorify God through the way He has instructed us: inner beauty expressed outwardly in good works, which benefit others.

Neither of these arguments–that tattoos are just a matter of taste or that tattoos can be used with the motive of glorifying God–are sufficient to prove that Christians should get tattoos, given the biblical prohibition against tattoos and the biblical instructions on how glorifying God is not a matter of external appearance.

Christians should refrain from getting tattoos to honor God as the craftsman of our appearance, to honor God as the definer of our individuality, and to honor God as the giver of our health. This matters to the church as we "consider how to stir up one another to love and good works" (Heb 10:24) and as we encourage one another to keep ourselves "unstained from the world" (Jas 1:27).

Authority Given by the Father to the Son?

"since you have given him authority over all flesh to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. (John 17:2 ESV) 

According to divine nature, Father and Son are equal in authority.

According to redemptive plan, the Father has given the Son authority.

The Hours of Prayer Before the Hour of Suffering

When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven and said,

“Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, (John 17:1 ESV) 

Jesus taught us to pray, "Our Father in Heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven." (Matt 6:9b-10 NIV 1984)

Jesus exemplifies this teaching through His own prayer. "The hour" is the time of His passion.

 

Two ideas I want to keep in mind all this year to help drive my Christian life and evangelism:

- Jesus is a living person (not just an idea), and I should daily grow in my relationship with Him.

- Hell is real. 

A Lament for the Greatest Rock Band

Watching Peter Jackson's documentary The Beatles: Get Back (released in November 2021) was an  amazing experience for a Beatles fan. Getting to be a fly-on-the-wall as these great artists create, rehearse, and record an album of songs was a dream come true. The documentary revealed the ongoing and growing tensions between band members, how they were drifting apart due to differing interests, and how the breakup of the Beatles was likely inevitable (and not really Yoko Ono's fault).

By the time the videos and audio that became Get Back were recorded, the Beatles had been playing their instruments and performing together for so long that they were masters at playing and songwriting. Watching Get Back, it is incredible to listen as songs quickly go from fuzzy ideas to the fully-formed hits that fans still enjoy today.

Get Back also highlights how John and Paul's rebellious, counter-cultural, and iconoclastic tendencies made it virtually impossible for them to write songs that could communicate political or spiritual commitments (or, seemingly, to stay focused on those commitments for long). This limitation is especially apparent as Paul composes "Get Back" and as John works at "Child of Nature."

The refrain from "Get Back" ("get back to where you once belonged") is indicative of Paul's original idea for the song: to be a satirical take, protesting the anti-immigrant rhetoric of some British politicians at the time. The most complete original verse is the following:

Meanwhile back at home too many Pakistanis 

Living in a council flat 

Candidate Macmillan, tell us what your plan is 

Won’t you tell us where you’re at

By the time the final song was written, the political aspect was entirely dropped, and Paul seems to have chosen lyrics almost entirely on the basis of rhythm and rhyme.

A version of "Child of Nature" was recorded when the Beatles were working on the White Album, but it did not appear on that record. As seen in Get Back, John was still working on the song when the Beatles were recording Let It Be. Eventually, John used the music from "Child of Nature" for the song "Jealous Guy," which he released on his solo album, Imagine. Though "Jealous Guy" is more emotionally complex than "A Hard Day's Night" or some other Beatles songs, it does still center around romantic love, losing the nature-centered spiritual theme of the original lyrics.

Beatles' lyrics (Lennon/McCartney lyrics in particular) are cool and catchy, and they certainly speak to Beatles fans on some level. Beatles' lyrics range from nonsensical (as with the final version of "Get Back" or John's "Dig a Pony," which is also on Let It Be) to romantic (as with "In My Life") to pensive (as with "Norwegian Wood"). Beatles' lyrics rarely attempt any hint of political or spiritual themes. What if this amazingly skilled, spectacularly popular band had connected listeners to broader societal issues? What if Lennon and McCartney had made it their goal to not only make hearers feel cool, but to lead them to think deeply? As it is, Beatles' lyrics at their best are known for highlighting introspection and intense feelings. As such, they are part of the fabric of societal dissolution in the postmodern age. 

Charles Spurgeon on the Gospel: Substitutionary Atonement

Charles Spurgeon wrote in his Autobiography: 

I have always considered, with Luther and Calvin, that the sum and substance of the gospel lies in that word Substitution–Christ standing in the stead of man. If I understand the gospel, it is this: I deserve to be lost forever; the only reason I should not be damned is this, that Christ was punished in my stead, and there is no need to execute a sentence twice for sin.

Matthew Henry on "Sons of God" in Genesis 6

Commenting on Genesis 6:1-3, Matthew Henry writes: 

---

      1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

      For the glory of God's justice, and for warning to a wicked world, before the history of the ruin of the old world, we have a full account of its degeneracy, its apostasy from God and rebellion against him. The destroying of it was an act, not of an absolute sovereignty, but of necessary justice, for the maintaining of the honour of God's government. Now here we have an account of two things which occasioned the wickedness of the old world:-- 1. The increase of mankind: Men began to multiply upon the face of the earth. This was the effect of the blessing (ch. i. 28), and yet man's corruption so abused and perverted this blessing that it was turned into a curse. Thus sin takes occasion by the mercies of God to be the more exceedingly sinful. Prov. xxix. 16, When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth. The more sinners the more sin; and the multitude of offenders emboldens men. Infectious diseases are most destructive in populous cities; and sin is a spreading leprosy. Thus in the New-Testament church, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring (Acts vi. 1), and we read of a nation that was multiplied, not to the increase of their joy, Isa. ix. 3. Numerous families need to be well-governed, lest they become wicked families. 2. Mixed marriages (v. 2): The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose. But what was amiss in these marriages? (1.) They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair, which was all they looked at. (2.) They followed the choice which their own corrupt affections made: they took all that they chose, without advice and consideration. But, (3.) That which proved of such bad consequence to them was that they married strange wives, were unequally yoked with unbelievers, 2 Cor. vi. 14. This was forbidden to Israel, Deut. vii. 3, 4. It was the unhappy occasion of Solomon's apostasy (1 Kings xi. 1-4), and was of bad consequence to the Jews after their return out of Babylon, Ezra ix. 1, 2. Note, Professors of religion, in marrying both themselves and their children, should make conscience of keeping within the bounds of profession. The bad will sooner debauch the good than the good reform the bad. Those that profess themselves the children of God must not marry without his consent, which they have not if they join in affinity with his enemies.

      3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.

      This comes in here as a token of God's displeasure at those who married strange wives; he threatens to withdraw from them his Spirit, whom they had grieved by such marriages, contrary to their convictions: fleshly lusts are often punished with spiritual judgments, the sorest of all judgments. Or as another occasion of the great wickedness of the old world; the Spirit of the Lord, being provoked by their resistance of his motions, ceased to strive with them, and then all religion was soon lost among them. This he warns them of before, that they might not further vex his Holy Spirit, but by their prayers might stay him with them. Observe in this verse,

      I. God's resolution not always to strive with man by his Spirit. The Spirit then strove by Noah's preaching (1 Pet. iii. 19, 20) and by inward checks, but it was in vain with the most of men; therefore, says God, He shall not always strive. Note, 1. The blessed Spirit strives with sinners, by the convictions and admonitions of conscience, to turn them from sin to God. 2. If the Spirit be resisted, quenched, and striven against, though he strive long, he will not strive always, Hos. iv. 17. 3. Those are ripening apace for ruin whom the Spirit of grace has left off striving with.

      II. The reason of this resolution: For that he also is flesh, that is, incurably corrupt, and carnal, and sensual, so that it is labour lost to strive with him. Can the Ethiopian change his skin? He also, that is, All, one as well as another, they have all sunk into the mire of flesh. Note, 1. It is the corrupt nature, and the inclination of the soul towards the flesh, that oppose the Spirit's strivings and render them ineffectual. 2. When a sinner has long adhered to that interest, and sided with the flesh against the Spirit, the Spirit justly withdraws his agency, and strives no more. None lose the Spirit's strivings but those that have first forfeited them.

      III. A reprieve granted, notwithstanding: Yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years; so long I will defer the judgment they deserve, and give them space to prevent it by their repentance and reformation. Justice said, Cut them down; but mercy interceded, Lord, let them alone this year also; and so far mercy prevailed, that a reprieve was obtained for six-score years. Note, The time of God's patience and forbearance towards provoking sinners is sometimes long, but always limited: reprieves are not pardons; though God bear a great while, he will not bear always.

      4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

      We have here a further account of the corruption of the old world. When the sons of God had matched with the daughters of men, though it was very displeasing to God, yet he did not immediately cut them off, but waited to see what would be the issue of these marriages, and which side the children would take after; and it proved (as usually it does), that they took after the worst side. Here is,

      I. The temptation they were under to oppress and do violence. They were giants, and they were men of renown; they became too hard for all about them, and carried all before them, 1. With their great bulk, as the sons of Anak, Num. xiii. 33. 2. With their great name, as the king of Assyria, Isa. xxxvii. 11. These made them the terror of the mighty in the land of the living; and, thus armed, they daringly insulted the rights of all their neighbours and trampled upon all that is just and sacred. Note, Those that have so much power over others as to be able to oppress them have seldom so much power over themselves as not to oppress; great might is a very great snare to many. This degenerate race slighted the honour their ancestors had obtained by virtue and religion, and made themselves a great name by that which was the perpetual ruin of their good name.

      II. The charge exhibited and proved against them, v. 5. The evidence produced was incontestable. God saw it, and that was instead of a thousand witnesses. God sees all the wickedness that is among the children of men; it cannot be concealed from him now, and, if it be not repented of, it shall not be concealed by him shortly. Now what did God take notice of? 1. He observed that the streams of sin that flowed along in men's lives, and the breadth and depth of those streams: He saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth. Observe the connection of this with what goes before: the oppressors were mighty men and men of renown; and, then, God saw that the wickedness of man was great. Note, The wickedness of a people is great indeed when the most notorious sinners are men of renown among them. Things are bad when bad men are not only honoured notwithstanding their wickedness, but honoured for their wickedness, and the vilest men exalted. Wickedness is then great when great men are wicked. Their wickedness was great, that is, abundance of sin was committed in all places, by all sorts of people; and such sin as was in its own nature most gross, and heinous, and provoking; it was committed daringly, and with a defiance of heaven, nor was any care taken by those that had power in their hands to restrain and punish it. This God saw. Note, All the sins of sinners are known to God the Judge. Those that are most conversant in the world, though they see much wickedness in it, yet they see but little of that which is; but God sees all, and judges aright concerning it, how great it is, nor can he be deceived in his judgment. 2. He observed the fountain of sin that was in men's hearts. Any one might see that the wickedness of man was great, for they declared their sin as Sodom; but God's eye went further: He saw that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually--a sad sight, and very offensive to God's holy eye! This was the bitter root, the corrupt spring: all the violence and oppression, all the luxury and wantonness, that were in the world, proceeded from the corruption of nature; lust conceived them, Jam. i. 15. See Matt. xv. 19. (1.) The heart was naught; it was deceitful and desperately wicked. The principles were corrupt, and the habits and dispositions evil. (2.) The thoughts of the heart were so. Thought is sometimes taken for the settled judgment or opinion, and this was bribed, and biased, and misled; sometimes it signifies the workings of the fancy, and these were always either vain or vile, either weaving the spider's web or hatching the cockatrice's egg. (3.) The imagination of the thoughts of the heart was so, that is, their designs and devices were wicked. They did not do evil through mere carelessness, as those that walk at all adventures, not heeding what they do; but they did evil deliberately and designedly, contriving how to do mischief. It was bad indeed; for it was only evil, continually evil, and every imagination was so. There was no good to be found among them, no, not at any time: the stream of sin was full, and strong, and constant; and God saw it; see Ps. xiv. 1-3.

---

Notice that Henry's explanation fits with the whole-Bible theme of the righteous intermingling with the wicked. His explanation also makes sense with God's explicit judgments against human beings for their wickedness. 

Augustine and Aquinas on "Sons of God" in Genesis 6

Answering the question of whether Genesis 6:1-2 indicates intermarriage of demons with humans, Thomas Aquinas writes in Summa Theologiae, Part I, Question 51, Article 3:

As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv): "Many persons affirm that they have had experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God's holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by 'the sons of God' are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good, while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them, for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge.

Thomas continues:

Still, if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose, as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man...so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man.

General and Special Revelation

God is transcendent: infinitely above and beyond all creation. The only way people have accurate knowledge of God is for God to condescend to reveal Himself to us. God reveals Himself in a general way and in a special way. 

General Revelation

General revelation is God's revelation of Himself to all people at all times. General revelation comes:

1. Through nature, revealing God as the powerful and wise Creator;

2. Through conscience, revealing God as the Moral Lawgiver.

The doctrine of general revelation is reflected in Romans 1.

Special Revelation

As Dr. George Martin explains, special revelation is "God's particular communication of Himself to particular persons at particular times." Special revelation is necessary for obtaining spiritual life. There are two major categories of special revelation: external special revelation and internal special revelation.

External special revelation refers to the Bible: God's written Word of self-disclosure, external to the individual.

Internal special revelation refers to the way that God specially reveals Himself within the individual soul. Internal special revelation comes through the vehicle of external special revelation (Rom 10:17). Internal special revelation can be considered in two stages:

1. Preparatory internal special revelation: the work of the Spirit in applying Scripture's commands and Scripture's revelation of God's holiness to our hearts in such a way as to bring conviction to the conscience and to humble us before God.

2. Effectual internal special revelation: the work of the Spirit in granting spiritual life to the sinner so that sin is seen as detestable and Christ is seen as lovely.

Effectual internal special revelation is the concept to which John Bunyan refers in the Ninth Stage of The Pilgrim's Progress, when he has Hopeful and Christian tell Ignorance (who gives evidence of knowing many biblical facts, but who lacks saving faith): "Christ is so hid in God from the natural apprehensions of the flesh, that he cannot by any man be savingly known, unless God the Father reveals him to him... no man can know Jesus Christ but by the revelation of the Father."

Theological Triage: A Proposal

Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is the ninth president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary–the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) and one of the largest seminaries in the world. Dr. Mohler hosts two podcasts: “The Briefing” ("a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview") and “Thinking in Public” ("a series of conversations with the day’s leading thinkers"). Dr. Mohler also serves as the Centennial Professor of Christian Theology at Southern Seminary, as the editor-in-chief of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, and the editor of WORLD Opinions. He has contributed to over 100 other published works.

[The above paragraph was adapted from the author's bio in He Is Not Silent: Preaching in A Postmodern World and from https://albertmohler.com/about/.]

One unique contribution that Dr. Mohler has made to theological discourse is coining the term "theological triage". Over the years, Dr. Mohler has explained this term in several places. For example in his 2008 book He Is Not Silent: Preaching in A Postmodern World, Dr. Mohler wrote:

As anyone who visits a hospital emergency room is aware, a triage nurse is customarily in place to make a first-stage evaluation of which patients are most in need of care. A patient with a gunshot wound is cared for ahead of a sprained ankle. This makes perfect sense, and indeed to ignore this sense of priority would amount to medical malpractice! In a similar manner, the pastor [/theologian] must learn to discern different levels of theological importance. I identify three distinct orders of doctrine in terms of importance.

Summary

Dr. Mohler writes that first-order doctrines are those "essential to the Christian faith"–denial of these doctrines will place a person outside of Christianity. Second-order doctrines are those "necessary for the ordering of the local church"–disagreement on these doctrines will make it "impossible to function together in a single local congregation". Third-order doctrines are "those that may be the ground for fruitful theological discussion or debate, but that do not threaten the fellowship of a local congregation or denomination."

More recently, Gavin Ortlund of Truth Unites has written Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage (2020). Ortlund is explicitly indebted to Dr. Mohler's triage metaphor and categories, but he lists them a bit differently. He writes: 

First-rank doctrines are essential to the gospel itself. 

Second-rank doctrines are urgent for the health and practice of the church, such that they frequently cause Christians to separate at the level of local church, denomination, and/or ministry.

Third-rank doctrines are important to Christian theology, but not enough to justify separation or division among Christians.

Fourth-rank doctrines are unimportant to our gospel witness and ministry collaboration.

Ortlund's explanation of first-rank and second-rank doctrines tracks exactly with Dr. Mohler's first-order and second-order doctrines. Ortlund divides Dr. Mohler's third-order doctrines into two 'ranks'. Ortlund's motivation in this division seems to be ministry-driven; as a public theologian, Ortlund regularly engages in theological discussions and debates, so by categorizing some doctrines as "fourth-rank," he is able to better focus on first through third rank doctrines, while avoiding distractions by (at least relatively) unimportant doctrines.

Proposal

It may be the case that an additional "order" or "rank" is needed in this rubric of theological triage. In both Dr. Mohler's and Gavin Ortlund's explanations of second-order or second-rank doctrines, there seems to be the assumption that differences among these doctrines will cause Christians to separate into both different congregations and different denominations. However, it may be the case that some doctrines would cause Christians to separate into different congregations, while still allowing for denominational cooperation.

For example, 9Marks has published several articles and podcast episodes arguing against multi-site churches, or even against churches holding multiple parallel services on a weekend for congregants to choose from. (They argue that churches planting churches is the ecclesiologically healthier model.) There are many churches in the SBC that are influenced by 9Marks and that agree with the critique of the multi-site church model; however, there are other churches in the SBC which utilize the multi-site model or which have multiple parallel services on the weekend. Whereas a person with a conviction against multi-site churches could not become a member of a site in such a network, it seems that the SBC has been able to promote friendly cooperation between multi-site churches and those who object to the multi-site model. Therefore, it may be the case that among second-rank doctrines, there are some that are so serious as to distinguish different denominations and some that would distinguish different congregations within the denomination.

IF this division of second-rank doctrines is NOT valid (if every doctrinal distinction that would distinguish one congregation from another should also distinguish one denomination from another, and vice-versa), then there are several doctrines (like multi-site churches and the ordination of female deacons, to give another example) that the SBC needs to address at the denominational level.