I fell off the Sunday hymn post bandwagon so long ago that I forgot what it looks like. I won't make any promises that I'll be back next week. I heard this hymn on the Indelible Grace IV - Beams of Heaven CD. I keep thinking about it. It is very profound, and more than a little bit scary.
1. I asked the Lord that I might grow in faith and love and every grace
Might more of His salvation know And seek more earnestly His face
2. Twas He who taught me thus to pray and He I trust has answered prayer
But it has been in such a way as almost drove me to despair
3. I hoped that in some favored hour at once He'd answer my request
And by His love's constraining power subdue my sins and give me rest
4. Instead of this He made me feel the hidden evils of my heart
And let the angry powers of Hell assault my soul in every part
5. Yea more with His own hand he seemed Intent to aggravate my woe Crossed all the fair designs I schemed, cast out my feelings, laid me low
6. Lord why is this, I trembling cried, “wilt Thou pursue thy worm to death?” "Tis in this way" The Lord replied "I answer prayer for grace and faith"
7. “These inward trials I employ from self and pride to set thee free
And break thy schemes of earthly joy that thou mayest seek thy all in me, That thou mayest seek thy all in me.”
John Newton, 1725-1807
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Learning from the Bad Guys
A week ago last night we began a historical series in our mens' Bible study on Wednesday night. I'm calling it "Our Debt to Heresy," a title I ripped off from a Modern Reformation issue (May/June, 2001).
I'm not going to post the whole text of each study here, but I will post excerpts. If you spot mistakes, let me know in the comments, and I will take that correction to our study.
Our Debt to Heresy – Week 1: Introduction
Outline:
· Introduction
· Gnosticism – Can Christianity be reconciled with Paganism?
· Montanism – What is the Nature of Revelation?
· Arianism – Who is Jesus?
· Pelagianism – What is Man?
· The Roman Catholic Church – Who Holds the Keys?
· Manifest Destiny – A New World, New Heresies
Setting the stage:
The Apostolic Age:
- See Acts 17:6 and context - Turning the world upside down
- Read Acts 28:11-31 - Jesus and the Kingdom
- Read Hebrews 2:1-4 - The foundation of the Apostles
The Post-apostolic Period:
- The Christian Life defended: The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus
- Christians and the State: Pliny to Trajan
- General Christian teaching: Didache
Defining our terms:
- Heresy: from the Greek hairesis, meaning “to take or to choose.” In English, the word has come to mean a teaching or opinion that is opposed to orthodox doctrine.
- Orthodoxy: from the Greek ortho, meaning “right, true or straight” plus doxo, meaning thinking or opinion. It is literally “right thinking” (cf. orthopraxy, “right doing”). In English it has come to mean being in conformity to conventional standards. It the case of Christianity, it means holding to “the teaching,” i.e. sound doctrine.
David Calhoun on the Rise of Heresy:
The question is often asked, which came first? Did orthodoxy come first, followed by the heresies? Or did the heresies arise first and then the church in response to the heresies moved to create what we call orthodoxy? One modern scholar has put it this way, “In early Christianity there was no such thing as orthodoxy but only different forms of Christianity competing for the loyalties of believers.” This scholar believed that there were many ideas out there and finally some of those ideas won. Either the ideas of the Roman church, which became the strongest, were imposed on the entire church or, in some way certain ideas won. So in his point of view the heresies come first. There were many ideas and then gradually one idea became called orthodoxy. In that particular way of reading history the orthodox are simply the winners and the heretics are the losers. I describe that not because that is my view but because I want you to see that this question is one that people have given much thought to. The early church fathers did not view it that way. The early church fathers said that orthodoxy came first and then the heresies. The heresies were the innovations, the new things. Orthodoxy was not. Eusebius of Caesarea put it this way, “Orthodoxy does not have a history. It is true eternally. Heresy has a history, having arisen at particular times through particular teachers.” You can date the beginning of Montanism and Marcionism and these other heresies that we will talk about. But orthodoxy does not have a beginning. You cannot date it. Orthodoxy is eternally true and heresies come later, according to Eusebius. © Summer 2006, Dr. David Calhoun & Covenant Theological Seminary
How would we, as 21st Century Evangelicals, answer the question, “What came first, Heresy or orthodoxy?
Why does God allow heresy to flourish even to the point of almost overwhelming the church?
Examples:
- Gnosticism – almost overwhelmed the church in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries
- Arianism – Was probably the majority report in the church by the beginning of the 4th Century
- The “Golden Age” of the Roman Catholic Church took over Europe almost entirely
- The popularity of Mormonism, the JWs and many other cults today.
Note the warnings of Scripture:
· Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc. – beware of false prophets and abusive shepherds!
· Matthew 7:15-23 – bad fruit, wolves, false professions
· Acts 20:25-32 – wolves from without, false teachers from within
· 2 Thessalonians 2 – beware of great deception and the blindness that results
· Jude – earnestly content, for there are enemies of the truth
· Revelation – deceptions, the counterfeit trinity, etc.
We should not be surprised that the truth faces opposition in this world. Perhaps we should be concerned if what we believe and teach does not raise any controversy!
Resources for further study:
· www.churchtimeline.com – includes links to articles on major events and people
· www.monergism.com – oodles of articles on a variety of historical and theological issues from a trustworthy perspective
· www.equip.org – Home of The Bible Answer Man, articles on cults and aberrant theology
I'm not going to post the whole text of each study here, but I will post excerpts. If you spot mistakes, let me know in the comments, and I will take that correction to our study.
Our Debt to Heresy – Week 1: Introduction
Outline:
· Introduction
· Gnosticism – Can Christianity be reconciled with Paganism?
· Montanism – What is the Nature of Revelation?
· Arianism – Who is Jesus?
· Pelagianism – What is Man?
· The Roman Catholic Church – Who Holds the Keys?
· Manifest Destiny – A New World, New Heresies
Setting the stage:
The Apostolic Age:
- See Acts 17:6 and context - Turning the world upside down
- Read Acts 28:11-31 - Jesus and the Kingdom
- Read Hebrews 2:1-4 - The foundation of the Apostles
The Post-apostolic Period:
- The Christian Life defended: The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus
- Christians and the State: Pliny to Trajan
- General Christian teaching: Didache
Defining our terms:
- Heresy: from the Greek hairesis, meaning “to take or to choose.” In English, the word has come to mean a teaching or opinion that is opposed to orthodox doctrine.
- Orthodoxy: from the Greek ortho, meaning “right, true or straight” plus doxo, meaning thinking or opinion. It is literally “right thinking” (cf. orthopraxy, “right doing”). In English it has come to mean being in conformity to conventional standards. It the case of Christianity, it means holding to “the teaching,” i.e. sound doctrine.
David Calhoun on the Rise of Heresy:
The question is often asked, which came first? Did orthodoxy come first, followed by the heresies? Or did the heresies arise first and then the church in response to the heresies moved to create what we call orthodoxy? One modern scholar has put it this way, “In early Christianity there was no such thing as orthodoxy but only different forms of Christianity competing for the loyalties of believers.” This scholar believed that there were many ideas out there and finally some of those ideas won. Either the ideas of the Roman church, which became the strongest, were imposed on the entire church or, in some way certain ideas won. So in his point of view the heresies come first. There were many ideas and then gradually one idea became called orthodoxy. In that particular way of reading history the orthodox are simply the winners and the heretics are the losers. I describe that not because that is my view but because I want you to see that this question is one that people have given much thought to. The early church fathers did not view it that way. The early church fathers said that orthodoxy came first and then the heresies. The heresies were the innovations, the new things. Orthodoxy was not. Eusebius of Caesarea put it this way, “Orthodoxy does not have a history. It is true eternally. Heresy has a history, having arisen at particular times through particular teachers.” You can date the beginning of Montanism and Marcionism and these other heresies that we will talk about. But orthodoxy does not have a beginning. You cannot date it. Orthodoxy is eternally true and heresies come later, according to Eusebius. © Summer 2006, Dr. David Calhoun & Covenant Theological Seminary
How would we, as 21st Century Evangelicals, answer the question, “What came first, Heresy or orthodoxy?
Why does God allow heresy to flourish even to the point of almost overwhelming the church?
Examples:
- Gnosticism – almost overwhelmed the church in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries
- Arianism – Was probably the majority report in the church by the beginning of the 4th Century
- The “Golden Age” of the Roman Catholic Church took over Europe almost entirely
- The popularity of Mormonism, the JWs and many other cults today.
Note the warnings of Scripture:
· Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc. – beware of false prophets and abusive shepherds!
· Matthew 7:15-23 – bad fruit, wolves, false professions
· Acts 20:25-32 – wolves from without, false teachers from within
· 2 Thessalonians 2 – beware of great deception and the blindness that results
· Jude – earnestly content, for there are enemies of the truth
· Revelation – deceptions, the counterfeit trinity, etc.
We should not be surprised that the truth faces opposition in this world. Perhaps we should be concerned if what we believe and teach does not raise any controversy!
Resources for further study:
· www.churchtimeline.com – includes links to articles on major events and people
· www.monergism.com – oodles of articles on a variety of historical and theological issues from a trustworthy perspective
· www.equip.org – Home of The Bible Answer Man, articles on cults and aberrant theology
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Loaded Links
I've updated my links on the right side of the page - nothing major, just one addition and a few tweaks to keep things current.
Church Matters blog featured Dr. David Wells today, so I had to hurry up and add that relatively new blog to my roll. Don't miss it, there have been some excellent (and provocative) posts lately.
Just one more little plug: I never cease to be amazed at the ministry of Monergism.com. If you want a one stop shop for what's of value on line, this is your site. Monergismbooks.com is fantastic, too. We order stuff from there all the time. I'm excited about the books that are available to the church these days. Just click on "What's New" and "Coming Soon" list of books to see what I mean.
Church Matters blog featured Dr. David Wells today, so I had to hurry up and add that relatively new blog to my roll. Don't miss it, there have been some excellent (and provocative) posts lately.
Just one more little plug: I never cease to be amazed at the ministry of Monergism.com. If you want a one stop shop for what's of value on line, this is your site. Monergismbooks.com is fantastic, too. We order stuff from there all the time. I'm excited about the books that are available to the church these days. Just click on "What's New" and "Coming Soon" list of books to see what I mean.
Friday, February 01, 2008
And Now For Something Completely Different
I've been sick this week with a nasty cold. Maybe my resistance to humour is low, but I thought this was quite funny.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Right Angles
A while back, I was talking to someone in a church membership class about our church’s traditional position on women in ministry (complementarian, for those who are into the lingo). When I was challenged on this, I pointed out that the church always has a responsibility to be clear on biblical issues, but particularly when the surrounding culture has abandoned those ideas or is confused about them. I asked, “Can you think of another issue in our culture that is more muddled and unbiblical than gender?” I urged that we need to be at right-angles to the culture when the culture is clearly at odds with biblical teaching. When the would flounders, the church must speak with an authoritative voice.
This isn’t a post on gender issues, it’s a post on Christianity and culture issues. How should we speak to and about a watching world in order to be most honouring to God and most useful in our generation regarding Gospel proclamation?
The contemporary evangelical church is full of “we’ll come along-side, we’re not much different than you” voices. What we need desperately are some prophets; prophets who are willing to stand at right angles to culture – including the contemporary evangelical culture – and say hard things.
I'm thankful that the church has some of those prophetic voices; John Piper, Albert Mohler and Ravi Zacharias spring to mind, as do Mark Driscoll and Doug Wilson. These men are not afraid to stand at right angles to the prevailing winds of mainstream doctrine and thought.
I think it was Chesterton who said that any old dead thing can float downstream, and so much of what is popular today is caught up in the flotsam and jetsam of trendy Western culture (this brings up another value of the prophet: Their messages don't go out of style).
The quote in the post below by David Wells (an excellent prophet for the church, by the way), is a great example of speaking at right angles to the latest trends in the evangelical world. The Kingdom of God is God's! We who love the truth of God's Word ought to be alarmed by those who are teaching the latest brand of "kingdom now" doctrine that is coming largely from the Emergent circles. Brian McLaren's, The Secret Message of Jesus is a good example of this "radical new understanding" (read the first appendix for a defense of this "new" teaching). His essential message is that the church must downplay its emphasis on individual salvation and its focus on Heaven and work to realize the kingdom here and now through social action. In truth, this is a recycled version of the Social Gospel movement of the early 20th Century.
So then, they're saying, "We're going to focus on peace and love and making the world a better place without judging anyone for their religious beliefs." Find the right-angled, prophetic word in that statement. Radical, eh?
If we love truth, we must speak and live at right angles to conventional thinking. Likewise, if we love people, we must tell them the truth about our Holy God, sin, Heaven and Hell. If people are going to hear us, we're going to have to speak up and speak clearly - particularly on the many areas that are fuzzy and confused in popular thinking.
What got me thinking along these lines this morning was a quote that I came across as I was reading my blogs:
"To the hard of hearing you shout, and for the almost-blind you draw large and startling figures."-- Flannery O’Connor
That's exactly what I'm talking about (and doesn't that remind you of the Old Testament prophets). We must make truth-connections with people - even people in our pews. Before our world goes totally deaf and blind, right-angles must be primary mode of operation for the church in the 21st Century.
May God raise up many more prophetic voices.
This isn’t a post on gender issues, it’s a post on Christianity and culture issues. How should we speak to and about a watching world in order to be most honouring to God and most useful in our generation regarding Gospel proclamation?
The contemporary evangelical church is full of “we’ll come along-side, we’re not much different than you” voices. What we need desperately are some prophets; prophets who are willing to stand at right angles to culture – including the contemporary evangelical culture – and say hard things.
I'm thankful that the church has some of those prophetic voices; John Piper, Albert Mohler and Ravi Zacharias spring to mind, as do Mark Driscoll and Doug Wilson. These men are not afraid to stand at right angles to the prevailing winds of mainstream doctrine and thought.
I think it was Chesterton who said that any old dead thing can float downstream, and so much of what is popular today is caught up in the flotsam and jetsam of trendy Western culture (this brings up another value of the prophet: Their messages don't go out of style).
The quote in the post below by David Wells (an excellent prophet for the church, by the way), is a great example of speaking at right angles to the latest trends in the evangelical world. The Kingdom of God is God's! We who love the truth of God's Word ought to be alarmed by those who are teaching the latest brand of "kingdom now" doctrine that is coming largely from the Emergent circles. Brian McLaren's, The Secret Message of Jesus is a good example of this "radical new understanding" (read the first appendix for a defense of this "new" teaching). His essential message is that the church must downplay its emphasis on individual salvation and its focus on Heaven and work to realize the kingdom here and now through social action. In truth, this is a recycled version of the Social Gospel movement of the early 20th Century.
So then, they're saying, "We're going to focus on peace and love and making the world a better place without judging anyone for their religious beliefs." Find the right-angled, prophetic word in that statement. Radical, eh?
If we love truth, we must speak and live at right angles to conventional thinking. Likewise, if we love people, we must tell them the truth about our Holy God, sin, Heaven and Hell. If people are going to hear us, we're going to have to speak up and speak clearly - particularly on the many areas that are fuzzy and confused in popular thinking.
What got me thinking along these lines this morning was a quote that I came across as I was reading my blogs:
"To the hard of hearing you shout, and for the almost-blind you draw large and startling figures."-- Flannery O’Connor
That's exactly what I'm talking about (and doesn't that remind you of the Old Testament prophets). We must make truth-connections with people - even people in our pews. Before our world goes totally deaf and blind, right-angles must be primary mode of operation for the church in the 21st Century.
May God raise up many more prophetic voices.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
David Wells on the Kingdom of God
I was reminded of this quote by a comment from Ken Davis on the post right below this one - "Why - we might even stop believing that the future of church is up to us!" Right on, Ken (by the way, I wish I could be with you folks this weekend at the conference).
This is a repost of a quote from Dr. Well's book, Above All Earthly Pow'rs that I did a while ago on this blog. When I went looking for this post, I expected that I would find it just a few months ago. It turns out it was way back in March of 2007. Time flies when I'm not blogging.
The arrival of this reign of God was not nationalistically but spiritually focused, which was what caused the consternation among many of Jesus' hearers. Nevertheless, the prophetic vision began to be realized, albeit in an entirely unexpected way, that God would scatter his enemies (Mic. 4:11-13; Is. 13:19; cf. Joel 3:1-17; Zech. 12:1-9), for Satan's forces were being thrown into disarray (Matt. 12:28-29) and they recognized with fear who Jesus was (Mk. 1:24; 5:7-8). The note of judgment which fell on the cities (Lk. 21:20-24; 23:27-31; Matt. 11:20-24) fell decisively on the powers of darkness and Satan's household was plundered (Mk. 3:27).
All of this happened under God's sovereign hand. We can search for the Kingdom of God, pray for it, and look for it, but only God can bring it about (Lk. 23:51; Matt. 6:10, 33; Lk. 12:31). The Kingdom is God's to give and to take away; it is only ours to enter and accept (Matt. 21:43; Lk. 12:32). We can inherit it, possess it, or refuse to enter it, but it is not ours to build and we can never destroy it (Matt. 25:34; Lk. 10:11). We can work for the Kingdom, but we can never act upon it; we can preach it, but it is God's to establish (Matt. 10:7; Lk. 10:9, 12:32). All of this is an expression of the eschatological framework present throughout the New Testament. It has profound ramifications for its doctrines of salvation and the way in which it speaks of hope. God's inbreaking, saving, vanquishing Rule is his from first to last. It has no human analogs, not duplicates, no surrogates, allows of no human synergism. The inbreaking of the "age to come" into the present is accomplished by God alone.
– David Wells, Above All Earthly Pow'rs: Christ in a Postmodern World, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005, p. 214.
This is a repost of a quote from Dr. Well's book, Above All Earthly Pow'rs that I did a while ago on this blog. When I went looking for this post, I expected that I would find it just a few months ago. It turns out it was way back in March of 2007. Time flies when I'm not blogging.
The arrival of this reign of God was not nationalistically but spiritually focused, which was what caused the consternation among many of Jesus' hearers. Nevertheless, the prophetic vision began to be realized, albeit in an entirely unexpected way, that God would scatter his enemies (Mic. 4:11-13; Is. 13:19; cf. Joel 3:1-17; Zech. 12:1-9), for Satan's forces were being thrown into disarray (Matt. 12:28-29) and they recognized with fear who Jesus was (Mk. 1:24; 5:7-8). The note of judgment which fell on the cities (Lk. 21:20-24; 23:27-31; Matt. 11:20-24) fell decisively on the powers of darkness and Satan's household was plundered (Mk. 3:27).
All of this happened under God's sovereign hand. We can search for the Kingdom of God, pray for it, and look for it, but only God can bring it about (Lk. 23:51; Matt. 6:10, 33; Lk. 12:31). The Kingdom is God's to give and to take away; it is only ours to enter and accept (Matt. 21:43; Lk. 12:32). We can inherit it, possess it, or refuse to enter it, but it is not ours to build and we can never destroy it (Matt. 25:34; Lk. 10:11). We can work for the Kingdom, but we can never act upon it; we can preach it, but it is God's to establish (Matt. 10:7; Lk. 10:9, 12:32). All of this is an expression of the eschatological framework present throughout the New Testament. It has profound ramifications for its doctrines of salvation and the way in which it speaks of hope. God's inbreaking, saving, vanquishing Rule is his from first to last. It has no human analogs, not duplicates, no surrogates, allows of no human synergism. The inbreaking of the "age to come" into the present is accomplished by God alone.
– David Wells, Above All Earthly Pow'rs: Christ in a Postmodern World, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005, p. 214.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
The Great Divorce
In the spirit of, "The more things change the more they stay the same," consider the following quote from C.S. Lewis' The Great Divorce (1946). I particularly thought of the postmodern focus on the Kingdom of God being about what we do and their preference of questions to answers.
“Will you come with me to the mountains? It will hurt at first, until your feet are hardened. Reality is harsh to the feet of shadows. But will you come?”
“Well, that is a plan. I am perfectly ready to consider it. Of course I should require some assurances … I should want a guarantee that you are taking me to a place where I shall find a wider sphere of usefulness – and scope for the talent that God has given me – and an atmosphere of free inquiry – in short, all that one means by civilisation and – er – the spiritual life.”
“No,” said the other. “I can promise you none of these things. No sphere of usefulness: you are not needed there at all. No scope for your talents: only forgiveness for having perverted them. No atmosphere of inquiry, for I will bring you to the land not of questions but of answers, and you shall see the face of God.”
“Ah, but we must all interpret those beautiful words in our own way! For me there is no such thing as a final answer. The free wind of inquiry must always continue to blow through the mind, must it not? ‘Prove all things’ … to travel hopefully is better than to arrive.”
- C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, p. 40
“Will you come with me to the mountains? It will hurt at first, until your feet are hardened. Reality is harsh to the feet of shadows. But will you come?”
“Well, that is a plan. I am perfectly ready to consider it. Of course I should require some assurances … I should want a guarantee that you are taking me to a place where I shall find a wider sphere of usefulness – and scope for the talent that God has given me – and an atmosphere of free inquiry – in short, all that one means by civilisation and – er – the spiritual life.”
“No,” said the other. “I can promise you none of these things. No sphere of usefulness: you are not needed there at all. No scope for your talents: only forgiveness for having perverted them. No atmosphere of inquiry, for I will bring you to the land not of questions but of answers, and you shall see the face of God.”
“Ah, but we must all interpret those beautiful words in our own way! For me there is no such thing as a final answer. The free wind of inquiry must always continue to blow through the mind, must it not? ‘Prove all things’ … to travel hopefully is better than to arrive.”
- C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, p. 40
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Is There a Crisis in Evangelicalism?
A few years ago, Dr. David Wells wrote a chapter in the book The Compromised Church entitled, “The Present Evangelical Crisis: The Word in the World.” I have been thinking about one of his warnings. He said that one of the greatest dangers from this crisis is the fact that there does not seem to be a crisis at all. There are so many signs pointing to evangelical victory that the idea that there is a crisis seems like foolishness to many. This concept is fleshed out more in Dr. Well's book, No Place for Truth or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology (I could have used Francis Schaeffer's The Great Evangelical Disaster, but that's really going back a while).
In the years since this book was written (almost ten), many more people have responded to what is wrong with evangelicalism. Some of this response has been good and some has been bad. As a pastor, I've been struggling with the implications of True Evangelicalism (if I can put it that way) for many years. Even in our relatively conservative, Bible-loving, Reformation theology teaching church, purity in doctrine and life can be a tough thing to pursue. Gospel holiness has implications for worship, Sunday School Curriculum, counseling - everything! Making Gospel connections to every area of life is the work of the church. The lure of compromise for the sake of avoiding conflict and increasing numbers is ever-present, as is the remaining sin of all our members (myself included).
This is what concerns me with the vision of the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches in Canada. There is no talk of a crisis - no real sense of urgency for reform. Yes, there is a lot of talk of a needed turn-around to get churches on side with plans for growing. However, there appears to be a reductionistic attitude about the Great Commission, as if getting more people into our churches fulfills our Lord's mandate. The most frightening aspect of the crisis in evangelical churches is the false sense of security that many people feel in their decision for Christ when they may not be genuinely converted. This is a legacy of 19th Century revivialism that is a plague in Western evangelicalism (if you're not sure what I'm talking about, check out this article).
As an example that could be multipled thousands of times, let me share a story that I recently heard from a man who grew up in an evangelical church with a big youth group. He said that after youth on Friday, they would head out to the bush parties. He also said that the senior pastor's son was a key source for pot at their high school. Again, it looked big and dynamic on the outside, but inside there was death. This comes from a lack of the fear of God. I am afraid that the fear of God and a biblical understanding of sin are foreign concepts in many churches.
Who am I to say if people are real Christians or not? Don't I just have to take their confession at face value? "Judge not that you be not judged" is probably the best known verse in the Bible today, even though people do not know the reference (Matthew 7:1). This is same chapter where Jesus says:
I believe we do need to help churches turn around, plant new churches (particularly in our cities), and rally together to see this generation won for the Lord. However, we need to talk about the dangers all around us and flee to the cross. We must have uncompromised Gospel theology as our absolute centre; otherwise, we will be the blind leading the blind and we will all fall into the pit of the current evangelical crisis.
In the years since this book was written (almost ten), many more people have responded to what is wrong with evangelicalism. Some of this response has been good and some has been bad. As a pastor, I've been struggling with the implications of True Evangelicalism (if I can put it that way) for many years. Even in our relatively conservative, Bible-loving, Reformation theology teaching church, purity in doctrine and life can be a tough thing to pursue. Gospel holiness has implications for worship, Sunday School Curriculum, counseling - everything! Making Gospel connections to every area of life is the work of the church. The lure of compromise for the sake of avoiding conflict and increasing numbers is ever-present, as is the remaining sin of all our members (myself included).
This is what concerns me with the vision of the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches in Canada. There is no talk of a crisis - no real sense of urgency for reform. Yes, there is a lot of talk of a needed turn-around to get churches on side with plans for growing. However, there appears to be a reductionistic attitude about the Great Commission, as if getting more people into our churches fulfills our Lord's mandate. The most frightening aspect of the crisis in evangelical churches is the false sense of security that many people feel in their decision for Christ when they may not be genuinely converted. This is a legacy of 19th Century revivialism that is a plague in Western evangelicalism (if you're not sure what I'm talking about, check out this article).
As an example that could be multipled thousands of times, let me share a story that I recently heard from a man who grew up in an evangelical church with a big youth group. He said that after youth on Friday, they would head out to the bush parties. He also said that the senior pastor's son was a key source for pot at their high school. Again, it looked big and dynamic on the outside, but inside there was death. This comes from a lack of the fear of God. I am afraid that the fear of God and a biblical understanding of sin are foreign concepts in many churches.
Who am I to say if people are real Christians or not? Don't I just have to take their confession at face value? "Judge not that you be not judged" is probably the best known verse in the Bible today, even though people do not know the reference (Matthew 7:1). This is same chapter where Jesus says:
- "Do not give to dogs what is holy, and do not cast your pearls before swine." Who are the dogs and the pigs? How can we tell?
- "Beware of false prophets" - Doesn't this require making some judgments?
- "By their fruit you will know them" - Isn't this life inspection?
- "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of Heaven" - Wouldn't it be better to warn people in the church with God's judgment before they get to the real thing?
I wholly affirm the perseverance of the saints. However, the warning passages in Scripture regarding false Christians are there for a reason. We can't just dismiss Hebrews 6, 10 and 12 or 1 John, or James or the many other warnings to those whom the Puritans called "false professors."
It is hard to confront people when they are bearing bad fruit or gushing forth bitter water. It takes tremendous courage to stand up to people in the church when they promote bad theology or endorse non-biblical practices by their words or deeds. I've often failed here, but if we pastors continue to fail on this front, we've failed in our greatest responsibility. We are under-shepherds and if we don't take care of the sheep, who will? Wolves wear the clothing of sheep, and they rise up from within the church (see Acts 20). We need to warn people with tears (like Paul), but we still need to warn them.
If we are going to cultivate healthy churches, fulfil the Great Commission and reform the Fellowship, we are going to have to make the main things the main things. We can't assume the Gospel - and that includes concepts like God's righteous wrath, sin, eternal hell and the presence of imposters and false teachers in our midst. If we gloss over these things, we will lose the Gospel. This loss might not occur in this generation, but in will happen.
If we see a turnaround in the Fellowship and 70% of our churches are growing by at least 5% in 10 years (as opposed to 30% today), who will be the watchmen that are dilligent to promote sound doctrine and moral purity? If we have big churches without integrity in life and doctrine, we will go the same path as the United Church of Canada in the 60s. I will be branded as an extremist because of that last comment, but we need to think about it. We need to sound the alarm regarding new persepectives on justification, emergent churches, open theism and gender confusion. These doctrinal issues must be confronted and refuted. We must also urgently appeal for reform regarding the moral compromise that is becoming commonplace among professing evangelicals.I believe we do need to help churches turn around, plant new churches (particularly in our cities), and rally together to see this generation won for the Lord. However, we need to talk about the dangers all around us and flee to the cross. We must have uncompromised Gospel theology as our absolute centre; otherwise, we will be the blind leading the blind and we will all fall into the pit of the current evangelical crisis.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Change and Revitalization in the Fellowship
I am suspicious of change. It is my conservative nature, I suppose, but it is also because of experience. In the church, I trust the old paths far more than innovation. Part of my experience is a bottom shelf in my office that is full of dusty binders from past efforts at restructuring, refocusing and revising (I’m not alone, ask any pastor with more than 10 years of experience).
Change, however, is frequently necessary. One of the mottoes of the Reformation was, “Always Reforming.” It is human nature to wander away from the truth. We must always evaluate this drift and prayerfully seek to check it by returning to the Gospel. In Philippians 3:1, the Apostle Paul said, “To write the same things to you is no trouble to me and is safe for you.” In 2 Peter, we find a longer passage on this same point of reviewing the basics:
“Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to stir you up by way of reminder, since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.” 2 Peter 1:12-15
It should be evident to anyone with a pulse that change is needed in much of Western evangelicalism. Regarding the Fellowship of Churches that I belong to, I would not want to cling to the status quo or retreat to a vision from twenty or fifty years ago. I am not opposed to streamlining administrative structure, and, as one who is interested in the history of reformation and revival, I know that God uses individuals as His agents to orchestrate dramatic change.
My primary concern is regarding what I do not hear from our national leadership. For several years now, I have heard at national and regional conventions that we Fellowship Baptists are very strong on the Bible and doctrine. I do not believe that is true. I think that many of our churches (from my admittedly limited exposure) have been heavily influenced by the individualistic, moralistic and pietistic impulses that practically define contemporary evangelicalism. We have been told that because we are strong on Bible and doctrine, we must now work to cultivate relationships, develop servant leadership and focus more on prayer and evangelism. More recently, we are told that it is the structure that needs to change to make way for a more effective fulfillment of the Great Commission.
I am convinced that there is no substitute for biblical preaching centered on the Gospel of Jesus Christ (2 Timothy 3:14-4:5). This, I believe, is a weak spot in many of our churches. What I am trying to say is that we need to focus far more on what God has done in Christ as less on what we need to do. What we can do has always been a easier sell in the church, but being faithful to Gospel-centered ministry and the marks of a true church is urgent for real health in the long run.
I came across this quote from D.A. Carson recently, and it expresses my worry regarding the focus of the Fellowship very well:
I fear that the cross, without ever being disowned, is constantly in danger of being
dismissed from the central place it must enjoy, by relatively peripheral insights that
take on far too much weight. Whenever the periphery is in danger of displacing the
center, we are not far removed from idolatry. (from The Cross and Christian Ministry, p. 26).
So then, change away, Fellowship, change away, but change from the influence of the world and reform to the central standard of the Gospel in all areas of life and worship. Lord willing, I'll be leading our church to this kind of change right along with you.
Change, however, is frequently necessary. One of the mottoes of the Reformation was, “Always Reforming.” It is human nature to wander away from the truth. We must always evaluate this drift and prayerfully seek to check it by returning to the Gospel. In Philippians 3:1, the Apostle Paul said, “To write the same things to you is no trouble to me and is safe for you.” In 2 Peter, we find a longer passage on this same point of reviewing the basics:
“Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have. I think it right, as long as I am in this body, to stir you up by way of reminder, since I know that the putting off of my body will be soon, as our Lord Jesus Christ made clear to me. And I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things.” 2 Peter 1:12-15
It should be evident to anyone with a pulse that change is needed in much of Western evangelicalism. Regarding the Fellowship of Churches that I belong to, I would not want to cling to the status quo or retreat to a vision from twenty or fifty years ago. I am not opposed to streamlining administrative structure, and, as one who is interested in the history of reformation and revival, I know that God uses individuals as His agents to orchestrate dramatic change.
My primary concern is regarding what I do not hear from our national leadership. For several years now, I have heard at national and regional conventions that we Fellowship Baptists are very strong on the Bible and doctrine. I do not believe that is true. I think that many of our churches (from my admittedly limited exposure) have been heavily influenced by the individualistic, moralistic and pietistic impulses that practically define contemporary evangelicalism. We have been told that because we are strong on Bible and doctrine, we must now work to cultivate relationships, develop servant leadership and focus more on prayer and evangelism. More recently, we are told that it is the structure that needs to change to make way for a more effective fulfillment of the Great Commission.
I am convinced that there is no substitute for biblical preaching centered on the Gospel of Jesus Christ (2 Timothy 3:14-4:5). This, I believe, is a weak spot in many of our churches. What I am trying to say is that we need to focus far more on what God has done in Christ as less on what we need to do. What we can do has always been a easier sell in the church, but being faithful to Gospel-centered ministry and the marks of a true church is urgent for real health in the long run.
I came across this quote from D.A. Carson recently, and it expresses my worry regarding the focus of the Fellowship very well:
I fear that the cross, without ever being disowned, is constantly in danger of being
dismissed from the central place it must enjoy, by relatively peripheral insights that
take on far too much weight. Whenever the periphery is in danger of displacing the
center, we are not far removed from idolatry. (from The Cross and Christian Ministry, p. 26).
So then, change away, Fellowship, change away, but change from the influence of the world and reform to the central standard of the Gospel in all areas of life and worship. Lord willing, I'll be leading our church to this kind of change right along with you.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Still Watching the Fellowship
After attending our national convention a few weeks ago I posted some thoughts on changes that are going on in our Fellowship of Baptist churches. I appreciate the comments that I received right away, but there have been a few more today. Our national president, John Kaiser, took the time to answer some of my questions in that post (follow the link to Watching the Fellowship and read the comments, if you wish). Thanks for that Dr. Kaiser, and thanks to all of you who commented. If you missed this post on the first go-'round, feel free to join the conversation with a comment here or at that "Watching" post.
These are not simple issues. I have long thought that being the leader of a group of churches - particularly Baptist churches - must be a very difficult job. Like herding cats, I suppose. Because of our conviction regarding autonomous local churches, many Baptists have been suspicious of increasing centralization, a.k.a. "leave my church alone." By the way, no one in the Fellowship leadership is proposing an interventionist solution to the problems with our association - I'm just pointing out the nature of Baptist groups.
What, then, are associations for? The way I see it, we can do more together with like-minded churches than we can do alone. Leadership training (including the support of schools), missions, accountablity to a larger group of churches (including sharing a common affirmation of faith and receiving help in crisis situations) and encouragment in ministry. These are good things and I am all for Baptist churches in fellowship.
I am going to be an armchair quarterback in the coming weeks and post on what I think should be priorities for our Fellowship. I believe that the need for reform extends far beyond Fellowship into evangelicalism as a whole.
Stay tuned.
These are not simple issues. I have long thought that being the leader of a group of churches - particularly Baptist churches - must be a very difficult job. Like herding cats, I suppose. Because of our conviction regarding autonomous local churches, many Baptists have been suspicious of increasing centralization, a.k.a. "leave my church alone." By the way, no one in the Fellowship leadership is proposing an interventionist solution to the problems with our association - I'm just pointing out the nature of Baptist groups.
What, then, are associations for? The way I see it, we can do more together with like-minded churches than we can do alone. Leadership training (including the support of schools), missions, accountablity to a larger group of churches (including sharing a common affirmation of faith and receiving help in crisis situations) and encouragment in ministry. These are good things and I am all for Baptist churches in fellowship.
I am going to be an armchair quarterback in the coming weeks and post on what I think should be priorities for our Fellowship. I believe that the need for reform extends far beyond Fellowship into evangelicalism as a whole.
Stay tuned.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
First Online Messages
We have been planning a church website for a long time, but, with one thing and another, we haven't made it happen.
In the meantime, my first two online messages are up at Fellowship Baptist Church, Saskatoon. I was asked to speak at a conference and then on Sunday morning - they've put both the messages up here. There were a couple more speakers at the conference, but the messages didn't get posted - technical difficulties?
The first one, "The Church's Roots" was on biblical authority from 2 Timothy 3:14-4:5. The second one, "How to Fix the World" was from Ephesians 1:9-10.
My mom doesn't use the internet, but in case anyone else in interested, there you go.
In the meantime, my first two online messages are up at Fellowship Baptist Church, Saskatoon. I was asked to speak at a conference and then on Sunday morning - they've put both the messages up here. There were a couple more speakers at the conference, but the messages didn't get posted - technical difficulties?
The first one, "The Church's Roots" was on biblical authority from 2 Timothy 3:14-4:5. The second one, "How to Fix the World" was from Ephesians 1:9-10.
My mom doesn't use the internet, but in case anyone else in interested, there you go.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Our Glorious Inheritance
While preparing for Sunday's message on Ephesians 1:15-23, I came accross this gem from Matthew Henry:
Besides the heavenly inheritance prepared for the saints, there is a present inheritance in the saints; for grace is glory begun, and holiness is happiness in the bud.
Persistent Grace to Run the Race
I just finished reading When Sinners Say, 'I Do' by Dave Harvey. It is excellent (Tim Challies reviews it here). The subtitle is, Discovering the Power of the Gospel for Marriage. I am so thankful that there are new books and messages out there that are Gospel driven and that old cross-centered resources are finding a new audience among many people in evangelical churches who are weary of the essentially secular approach that many churches and groups have adopted.
I have certainly experienced a dissatisfaction with conferences, leadership events and pastors that don't seem to appreciate the centrality of the Gospel for every day. I try to have a good attitude, but when Christian books, events and programs don't look to grace to justify their purpose, they come off flat and shallow. For instance, a few of our men at church went with me to a leadership weekend a few years back. The presenter spent most of his time quoting from secular business books and dropping names of movers and shakers in the corporate world. There was very little Bible, and we didn't hear about anything in that retreat that only God could do (i.e., grace).
The same applies to various aspects of evangelicalism today; church growth, Christian counselling, parenting and marriage seminars and other aspects of Christian life are based on what we do rather than what only God can do. Secular models are borrowed and the Bible is set to the side (or a few proof-texts are pulled out). So many Christians need reform - a paradigm shift, a Copernican revolution.
In his message on the Gospel at the first meeting of The Gospel Coalition, Don Carson identified the problem as a misunderstanding of what the Gospel really is. He said that many believers think that the Gospel is for "tipping people into the Kingdom" and then it is left behind and the focus shifts to what we do. That is not good. The gospel must be central for all of life. As Jerry Bridges says, "preach the gospel to yourself every day" (if you haven't read any Jerry Bridges' books, or if you've just read, The Pursuit of Holiness, find and read The Discipline of Grace).
One critical passage on this theme is Galatians 3:1-3. The Galatians were "foolish" and "bewitched" because, after starting with grace through faith, they began to rely on human effort. Another key text is Titus 2:11-13 (which Dave Harvey unpacks in his book). The grace of God is operative in training us until the day we see Christ face-to-face.
Declaring this Gospel - from the pulpit and among non-believers - is the absolute center of true Christian life. Dave Harvey calls this "persistent grace to run the race." I love that phrase and I plan to swipe it.
Not everyone in my Fellowship of churches, not all the pastors in our Edson ministerial, not all the people in my my church get this concept yet. It is only by a revolution wrought by the Holy Spirit that we will get the Gospel in this comprehensive manner for all of life. I'm going to keep on promoting the gospel by preaching, teaching, recommending great books and messages and hammering away on this theme on my blog.
Thanks, Pastor Dave, for your book and that great phrase, "persistent grace to run the race."
I have certainly experienced a dissatisfaction with conferences, leadership events and pastors that don't seem to appreciate the centrality of the Gospel for every day. I try to have a good attitude, but when Christian books, events and programs don't look to grace to justify their purpose, they come off flat and shallow. For instance, a few of our men at church went with me to a leadership weekend a few years back. The presenter spent most of his time quoting from secular business books and dropping names of movers and shakers in the corporate world. There was very little Bible, and we didn't hear about anything in that retreat that only God could do (i.e., grace).
The same applies to various aspects of evangelicalism today; church growth, Christian counselling, parenting and marriage seminars and other aspects of Christian life are based on what we do rather than what only God can do. Secular models are borrowed and the Bible is set to the side (or a few proof-texts are pulled out). So many Christians need reform - a paradigm shift, a Copernican revolution.
In his message on the Gospel at the first meeting of The Gospel Coalition, Don Carson identified the problem as a misunderstanding of what the Gospel really is. He said that many believers think that the Gospel is for "tipping people into the Kingdom" and then it is left behind and the focus shifts to what we do. That is not good. The gospel must be central for all of life. As Jerry Bridges says, "preach the gospel to yourself every day" (if you haven't read any Jerry Bridges' books, or if you've just read, The Pursuit of Holiness, find and read The Discipline of Grace).
One critical passage on this theme is Galatians 3:1-3. The Galatians were "foolish" and "bewitched" because, after starting with grace through faith, they began to rely on human effort. Another key text is Titus 2:11-13 (which Dave Harvey unpacks in his book). The grace of God is operative in training us until the day we see Christ face-to-face.
Declaring this Gospel - from the pulpit and among non-believers - is the absolute center of true Christian life. Dave Harvey calls this "persistent grace to run the race." I love that phrase and I plan to swipe it.
Not everyone in my Fellowship of churches, not all the pastors in our Edson ministerial, not all the people in my my church get this concept yet. It is only by a revolution wrought by the Holy Spirit that we will get the Gospel in this comprehensive manner for all of life. I'm going to keep on promoting the gospel by preaching, teaching, recommending great books and messages and hammering away on this theme on my blog.
Thanks, Pastor Dave, for your book and that great phrase, "persistent grace to run the race."
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Healthy Churches - A Link to Get Started
I have been collecting some thoughts regarding healthy churches lately. I will do some posts soon, but here is something to get you started, a great post by Mark Dever over at the Together for the Gospel blog. It was written back in July of 2006.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Looking for a Better Way
I have posted on my concerns for the future of my association of churches and, by extension, much of evangelicalism today. In my own circles, I don't hear people denying central truths, but they are eclipsed by concerns for relevance and pragmatic systems.
These are big topics, but one of my frustrations is that many pastors that I talk to don't even get the categories (or think they do and reject my narrowness out of hand). I could point people to David Wells' four books that do such an excellent job diagnosing the problem, or even D.A. Carson's The Gagging of God (I can't believe that book is 11 years old already), but these books take some work.
I don't seem to have the words to express what's wrong briefly, so I have been hesitating to do a blog post or a blog series. Enter the wonderful world of the internet. Now I can just point people to Tim Challies post, "Ruined for Anything Else" and Michael Haykin's post, "Spiritual Vitality and Church Governance." Together, they form an excellent primer for what I perceive to be the greatest problems in our churches today. These two little posts don't say everything, but they are great discussion starters. Thanks, gentlemen!
These are big topics, but one of my frustrations is that many pastors that I talk to don't even get the categories (or think they do and reject my narrowness out of hand). I could point people to David Wells' four books that do such an excellent job diagnosing the problem, or even D.A. Carson's The Gagging of God (I can't believe that book is 11 years old already), but these books take some work.
I don't seem to have the words to express what's wrong briefly, so I have been hesitating to do a blog post or a blog series. Enter the wonderful world of the internet. Now I can just point people to Tim Challies post, "Ruined for Anything Else" and Michael Haykin's post, "Spiritual Vitality and Church Governance." Together, they form an excellent primer for what I perceive to be the greatest problems in our churches today. These two little posts don't say everything, but they are great discussion starters. Thanks, gentlemen!
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Watching the Fellowship
Last week I flew to Hamilton to attend the 54th annual convention of The Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches in Canada (FEBCC, henceforth, "The Fellowship"). I have attended a Fellowship Baptist Church since 1981, I took my undergrad and graduate studies at a Fellowship school and I have pastored in Fellowship churches since 1989.
The Fellowship is a diverse group of churches from coast to coast (about 500 of them). There are regional distinctions and distinctions between churches in any given region. We share a statement of faith and a national identity through missions, educational institutions and the national office. Some recent changes have given me lots to think about. I do plan to do a few posts on these changes. If any Fellowship pastors or members of Fellowship churches find this blog, I'd love to have your comments. If you are not a part of the Fellowship but wish to help me think through some of these questions, I'd appreciate your input.
This post is for background. Let me give a little bit more: In the Spring of 2006, the Fellowship hired a new President, Dr. John Kaiser. Dr. Kaiser came from Growing Healthy Churches (formerly American Baptist Churches of the West) in Northern California. He has written a book titled, Winning on Purpose: How to Organize Congregations to Succeed in their Mission. We took the first step toward retooling our National Fellowship this year at convention. We adopted Dr. Kaiser's "Accountable Leadership" model and did away with a multiple board structure for our agencies. This is for a six-year trial period. We can adopt or reject the new way of doing things at any Convention during that time. Dr. Kaiser is confident that we will be sold on the fruitfulness of the new structure.
The more I think about this new direction, the more questions I have. Here are a few of them for a start:
- Are we an association of churches or a denomination? Is that a meaningful distinction any more?
- I have serious reservations regarding a corporate model of leadership for local churches, but is it acceptable or even desirable for a National administration? The National Fellowship office is not a church, but exists to serve churches.
- With that in mind, is it important for an administrative body that serves churches to be theological, i.e. define their terms (missional, disciple, conversion, etc)? Is it safe to assume: a). we are on the same page on doctrine because of our shared affirmation of faith and / or b). theological precision is a local church matter?
- The ultimate purpose of these changes is to grow churches, both by expanding the size of existing churches and accelerating the planting of churches. What is the most effective way to influence local churches to achieve these goals while respecting their autonomy?
I am not opposed to streamlining administrations to make them more effective in accomplishing their mission. I am not opposed to helping churches grow and multiply - in fact, I could use some help in mobilizing our people to be more mission-minded here in Edson. One thing I do know is that I am not going to cheer for the team that wants to maintain the status-quo (I don't even know if that "team" exists). We do need change and renewal as a Fellowship of churches.
However, I want to know if my restlessness is warranted. Am I asking the right questions? Is there cause for alarm or shall I just hang tight and see what develops?
Friday, October 12, 2007
A Nearly Suspense-Free "Who Said It?"
Other bloggers do "Who Said It?" posts from time-to-time and I never get them. In fact, I sometimes fail to see who got the reference right in the comments because the blogger doesn't ever spill the beans. I won't cause you much anxiety. Below is a quote from a famous person. In this very post, I will reveal where the quote comes from. Before that, however, let me do a little back-story.
I brought this quote to a Bible-study several years ago. We had been "beating up" on the Pentecostals a little too much, I thought, so I brought this quote as a bit of balance. I handed it out and read it and asked, "Who said it?" The answers were interesting. Someone said that it sounded like some subjective mystic, but language was old, so it probably wasn't a modern Pentecostal. They were surprised when I told them who wrote this.
The quote:
“And here again we ought to observe that we are called to a knowledge of God: not that knowledge which, content with empty speculation, merely flits in the brain, but that which will be sound and fruitful if we duly perceive it, and if it takes root in the heart. Consequently, we know the most perfect way of seeking God, and the most suitable order, is not for us to attempt with bold curiosity to penetrate to the investigation of his essence, which we ought more to adore than meticulously to search out, but for us to contemplate him in his works whereby he renders himself near and familiar to us, and in some manner communicates himself. For each man’s mind is a labyrinth.”
I think this is a great quote. Adoration is indeed the right response to God as we receive what He has revealed about Himself in His Word and in creation. Getting God's truth into our hearts is also absolutely essential so that we may be fruitful, worshipping Christians. Sure, the Emergents and the Charismatics often go too far, but there is much mystery in God and His ways!
So ...
who
said
it?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-- John Calvin (Institutes, 1.5.9,12)
I brought this quote to a Bible-study several years ago. We had been "beating up" on the Pentecostals a little too much, I thought, so I brought this quote as a bit of balance. I handed it out and read it and asked, "Who said it?" The answers were interesting. Someone said that it sounded like some subjective mystic, but language was old, so it probably wasn't a modern Pentecostal. They were surprised when I told them who wrote this.
The quote:
“And here again we ought to observe that we are called to a knowledge of God: not that knowledge which, content with empty speculation, merely flits in the brain, but that which will be sound and fruitful if we duly perceive it, and if it takes root in the heart. Consequently, we know the most perfect way of seeking God, and the most suitable order, is not for us to attempt with bold curiosity to penetrate to the investigation of his essence, which we ought more to adore than meticulously to search out, but for us to contemplate him in his works whereby he renders himself near and familiar to us, and in some manner communicates himself. For each man’s mind is a labyrinth.”
I think this is a great quote. Adoration is indeed the right response to God as we receive what He has revealed about Himself in His Word and in creation. Getting God's truth into our hearts is also absolutely essential so that we may be fruitful, worshipping Christians. Sure, the Emergents and the Charismatics often go too far, but there is much mystery in God and His ways!
So ...
who
said
it?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-- John Calvin (Institutes, 1.5.9,12)
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Simplicity
I found this quote in David Powlison's, Speaking Truth in Love (highly recommended!):
"I would not give a fig for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the other side of complexity."
"I would not give a fig for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the other side of complexity."
Friday, October 05, 2007
It's just .. like ... WOW
Inexpressible, indescribable -- utterly amazing.
In an age of hyperbole -- especially in advertising (car commercials on the radio, anyone?) -- it is difficult to use words to express the glories revealed in God's Word. Actually, it has always been impossible to contain the glories of God and His works in words, but we should always be striving to do that very thing! Theologians teach that God's Word, though holy and perfect, is a condescension to our weakness. I'm reminded of the line in the hymn, "Stoop to our weakness, mighty as thou art." I wonder how our communication will develop over the timeless ages of eternity? We will always have the joy of trying to express the wonders of our Creator and Redeemer. That will be the chief occupation and pleasure of Heaven.
This fall I began a new sermon series on Ephesians. I knew Ephesians was a wonderful book (it has always been one of my favorites), but until I began a close study for preaching, I had no idea how, well, indescribable it was. I am overwhelmed, and I am just beginning.
Ephesians is about God and His work for His people. The closer you look, the bigger God's purposes in His Son for His glory in the church become. You cannot overstate how BIG this all is! I'm going to title my October 14th message on 1:7-12, "How to Fix the World" (wouldn't the modern Postmodern don't-be-too-certain-now types love that "arrogance"!). Meditate for a moment on 1:9-10:
... making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
Put that together with God's purposes for the church that Paul states in chapter 3 (... so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places ...) and your vision for what Christians are to be and do should grow immeasurably.
I was also humbled again this week by the sobering privilege of preaching. I can read and re-read a passage, do the text work and read commentaries. By that point, I understand the passage. Sort of. There is something else that happens, though, when I write out what I'm going to say to the congregation and then preach it. It is then that a passage often comes alive and I really get it in my heart as well as my head. This might sound rather esoteric, but I know other preachers will know what I'm talking about (if they're expositional preachers, that is!).
Lest you think too highly of me, let me admit that when I feel overwhelmed by what I discover, I am more likely to go get another cup of coffee or go online and check my blogs than I am to fall on my knees in worship, though there has been some of that as well. There is still a sense of Exodus 20:18-19 in my still sinful heart. When the light gets extreme, I often shrink away. I wish I could consistently want to bask in that light - to stay on the mountaintop, but I am so often weak. The more I realize the magnificence of God as He is revealed in His Word, the smaller I feel.
I know that there are some people from my congregation that read my blog (or at least did until I quit for a month), so I might be sticking my neck out with that last paragraph. I'm putting it there intentionally because I want to ask you, again, to pray for me. When I am weak, then I am strong. I want to grow in the grace of the Gospel. I want to be a doer of the word as well as a hearer (and preacher). I know it is only grace that gives me delight in God's Word, and I am thankful for this great honour preaching and preparing to preach.
Who is sufficient for these things?
In an age of hyperbole -- especially in advertising (car commercials on the radio, anyone?) -- it is difficult to use words to express the glories revealed in God's Word. Actually, it has always been impossible to contain the glories of God and His works in words, but we should always be striving to do that very thing! Theologians teach that God's Word, though holy and perfect, is a condescension to our weakness. I'm reminded of the line in the hymn, "Stoop to our weakness, mighty as thou art." I wonder how our communication will develop over the timeless ages of eternity? We will always have the joy of trying to express the wonders of our Creator and Redeemer. That will be the chief occupation and pleasure of Heaven.
This fall I began a new sermon series on Ephesians. I knew Ephesians was a wonderful book (it has always been one of my favorites), but until I began a close study for preaching, I had no idea how, well, indescribable it was. I am overwhelmed, and I am just beginning.
It struck me this week that if we could even really get Ephesians 1 - even Ephesians 1:1-13 - the church would be done with foolish compromises (worldliness), petty fights, discrimination and partiality, pride in our works, and scores of other sins and faults. This is very practical theology, because we are brought into the very purposes of God, and not just for us, for the universe.
Ephesians is about God and His work for His people. The closer you look, the bigger God's purposes in His Son for His glory in the church become. You cannot overstate how BIG this all is! I'm going to title my October 14th message on 1:7-12, "How to Fix the World" (wouldn't the modern Postmodern don't-be-too-certain-now types love that "arrogance"!). Meditate for a moment on 1:9-10:
... making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
Put that together with God's purposes for the church that Paul states in chapter 3 (... so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places ...) and your vision for what Christians are to be and do should grow immeasurably.
I was also humbled again this week by the sobering privilege of preaching. I can read and re-read a passage, do the text work and read commentaries. By that point, I understand the passage. Sort of. There is something else that happens, though, when I write out what I'm going to say to the congregation and then preach it. It is then that a passage often comes alive and I really get it in my heart as well as my head. This might sound rather esoteric, but I know other preachers will know what I'm talking about (if they're expositional preachers, that is!).
Lest you think too highly of me, let me admit that when I feel overwhelmed by what I discover, I am more likely to go get another cup of coffee or go online and check my blogs than I am to fall on my knees in worship, though there has been some of that as well. There is still a sense of Exodus 20:18-19 in my still sinful heart. When the light gets extreme, I often shrink away. I wish I could consistently want to bask in that light - to stay on the mountaintop, but I am so often weak. The more I realize the magnificence of God as He is revealed in His Word, the smaller I feel.
I know that there are some people from my congregation that read my blog (or at least did until I quit for a month), so I might be sticking my neck out with that last paragraph. I'm putting it there intentionally because I want to ask you, again, to pray for me. When I am weak, then I am strong. I want to grow in the grace of the Gospel. I want to be a doer of the word as well as a hearer (and preacher). I know it is only grace that gives me delight in God's Word, and I am thankful for this great honour preaching and preparing to preach.
Who is sufficient for these things?
Monday, October 01, 2007
I Missed September Entirely
I don't have anything against my little ol' blog, but I just haven't had the wits lately to post anything. My new Sunday morning series on Ephesians and our new James Bible study have eaten up all my brainpower. It has been busy, what with a new season of church programs and whatnot, but I can't use that as an excuse because we all make time for the things we value, don't we? I'm not going to make any promises or plans (those haven't worked out so well), but I might be more regular now that things have settled down a bit.
Thanks Steve for asking about my blog last night, and thanks Paul for the comment! Those inquiries are the reason for this post. I hope it's not the only one in October!
Thanks Steve for asking about my blog last night, and thanks Paul for the comment! Those inquiries are the reason for this post. I hope it's not the only one in October!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)