For those of you who are interested, here is a link to the church Jessica and I attended our first weekend together in Louisville.
Sojourn Community Church
We plan to visit around 10 churches and will post more later.
Showing posts with label Church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Church. Show all posts
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Our Father and Mother, Who Art In Heaven?
One of the most important issues facing the church today, as it has for centuries past, centers around the matter of changing language when speaking of God. Language is always changing. Dictionaries and grammars are frequently revised to include new words and phrases which become more commonplace with the march of time. Some radical feminists and revisionists are saying that the Scriptures are written in male terms and that the Bible should be corrected or adapted to fit today’s post-post-postmodern culture (I may have left out a few “posts”). They maintain that we must eliminate the male bias which supposedly runs throughout the Bible, and this includes references to the human family (such as "mankind"), and allusions to a male God (such as "the Father"), and the use of male pronouns (such as "he"). They argue that Bible descriptions are authoritarian and gender distinctive and in our day such terms are no longer useful; Biblical language must accommodate itself to the insights of the modern age.
For some time it has been quite evident that there are those working diligently to perform a major sex-change operation on the Bible's language. This is a high-priority agenda item for some people. And although I believe the trend toward inclusive language is not all bad, I believe it has gone too far. And the "too far" for us has to do primarily with the attempt to eliminate all male references to the God of Scripture.
Some Inclusivist Examples:
In our day, the feminist critics are calling for a number of word changes that would make our language more inclusive of men and women. It is true that there have been some biases built into the words and phrases that are commonly used in church circles. It is not always helpful, for example, to refer to a congregation as "men" or "brethren." In sensitivity to other persons, we can make an effort to be inclusive. We do not object to using the phrase "men and women" (instead of "men") when referring to people, nor is it offensive to speak of "chairpersons" instead of chairmen," or to say "mail carrier" instead of mailman."
It is okay with most people to say that "utility men" are "utility persons" and that "manholes" are "person holes." It doesn't bother most of us if inspectors want to work in "sewer holes" instead of "manholes." And certainly all of us should intentionally avoid use of stereotypes such as 11 woman driver" or "scatterbrained female." However, the present-day discussion in church circles is not primarily concerned with typical references to people. The more serious concern centers around language which is used in reference to God.
There are groups within our churches that call for widening the terms used for God so that the language includes female images of God. They want all exclusive male references to God removed from the Bible. The language and wordpictures used in the Bible, they say, must be changed. The National Council of Churches, for example, has prepared inclusive translations of Scripture passages for use in its Lectionaries. In the NCC-sponsored Inclusive Language Lectionary, language for people is changed to include women as well as men. For example, it can be helpful to translate "Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly" (Psalm 1:1) as "Blessed are those who walk not in the counsel of the ungodly" -and to render "Let your light shine before men" (Matthew 5:16), as "Let your light shine before others"--and to say, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men and women," instead of the translation formerly used. But to change language about God (to speak of God as Father "and Mother," and Christ as "Child" of God) is unacceptable and can lead to some serious consequences, some of which I will briefly mention:
(a) God as Mother
The Scripture translations for the Inclusive Language add the words "and Mother" whenever there are references to God the Father. It is true that in several Old Testament texts, God is pictured as a woman giving birth, as a mother tending a small child, as a nursing mother, as a woman putting food and water on the table, etc. Christians down through the years have often referred to the motherly tenderness of God. It is true that in some ways God is like a mother-but God is never called "Mother." This is something significant. When we speak of God as "Father," we are including not only His fatherly (but also His motherly) qualities.
The word "Father" is the most distinctive name that Christians use for God. It is interesting to note that Muslims have 99 names for God (Protector, Provider, etc.), but not one of them is "Father." Christians have learned to use the name "Father" by following the example of Jesus; this was the name by which He knew God. Even as a boy, Jesus said, "Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business?" (Luke 2:49 NKJV). The last words of Jesus on the Cross were, "Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit" (Luke 23:46). When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, He said, "Say, Our Father who art in heaven." And it is dangerous for us to tamper with those words. The prayer begins with "Our Father," and goes on to say, "Hallowed be thy name." What name? The name which opens the prayer—" Father." To use the word "Father" when referring to God is simply to follow the example which Jesus set for us.
There is also a trend in hymnwriting that uses feminine imagery for God. British poet Brian Wren is a leader in the trend in hymnwriting. One of Wren's most controversial hymns is entitled "Strong Mother God." The hymn begins by calling God "Mother." Later verses address God as warm, father God; great, living God; old, aching God; and young, growing God." For the feminists, the hymn "God of our Fathers" becomes "God of the Ages." The line of another hymn is changed from "Like a loving father" to "Like a loving parent."
(b) Jesus as Lord
Inclusivists say that to sing songs like "The Church's One Foundation is Jesus Christ Our Lord"-is to use sexist language and is not sensitive to the concerns of women. They say that the Bible (with all its talk about "lords" and “kings") reflects an ancient feudal society which is not acceptable in our day.
The feminist critics find something grievously wrong with the beginning of the Twenty-third Psalm. The sentence "The Lord is my shepherd," they say, has a male-oriented sound, and so it is translated "God is my shepherd." In their view, no one is in a position of "lord" over another. The words of Sarah recorded in I Peter 3 make them cringe: "So once the holy women who hoped in God ... were submissive to their husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord" (I Peter 3:5-6, RSV). The word "lord" is a four-letter "no-no" in feminist thinking.
Dropping the term "Lord" (in reference to Jesus) is a serious departure from truth. Early Christians repeatedly declared that "Jesus is Lord.” This was in direct contradiction to the loyalties of citizens in the Mediterranean world. Citizens of the Roman Empire were required to declare that "Caesar is lord" (meaning that "Caesar is God")-and precisely because Christians confessed that Jesus is Lord, many early Christians lost their lives. They refused to bow their knee to Caesar. If we drop the word "Lord" (when referring to Jesus), we are in effect denying the totality of who Jesus is, and we are not giving due credit to the special relationship which Jesus has with the Father, who (along with the Holy Spirit) are one God manifest in three Persons.
In the new translations, Jesus is no longer "Son of God" or "Son of man," but He is now "Child of God" or "Human One." And the sentences are re-written so that the pronouns "he" and "him" do not appear. Thus, in the new translations, John 3:16 reads, "For God so loved the world that God gave God's only Child, that whoever believes in that Child should not perish, but have eternal life."
What’s the Result of All This?
What is behind all this call for change in language? Where might it eventually lead us? Since meaning is bound up in language and God has decided to reveal himself to us most directly in the form of words, surely one cannot change the language for God without altering his understanding of who God is.
The result of changing the description of God from "Father" to "Mother/ Father" is to create the picture of a partly male and partly female God. And to make Christ "the Child" instead of "the Son" is to picture Him as immature. To speak of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-as "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier"- may at first seem like an innocent change. But the terms "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" have a precise theological meaning which is not communicated by any other terms. The words "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier" are functional names (focusing on God's deeds), whereas "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" are names that focus on God's own essence and the nature of His being. There are a number of results that rise out of attempts to tamper with the names for God.
(a) Questions the Validity of Special Revelation
To believe that God is creator is self-evident; it is something which all religions believe and teach in some form or another. But to believe in God as Father is not self-evident; that belief comes to us especially through what Jesus tells us about God. In Matthew we read, "...no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him" (Matthew 11:27b, NIV).
(b) Takes Lightly the True Authority of Jesus
God is referred to as "Father" in twenty-five of the New Testament Books. Thus the teaching about God as "Father" is not an obscure doctrine.
Was Jesus wrong in telling us to pray to God by saying, "Our Father who art in heaven"? And if Jesus was wrong in teaching us to address God as "Father," He might be wrong about other things as well. To eliminate the word "Father" when referring to God is to deny that Jesus had any valid authority.
God is a deliberate God. He is not random or haphazard in his judgments. He is infinitely wise and sovereign. And if we believe so, we should believe and accept his revelation to us as "Father" as perfect and pleasing and acceptable.
(c) Diminishes God to the Level of the Mundane
To present God as "Mother and Father" is not only clumsy, but also repulsive to concerned Christians. God (when called "Mother and Father") becomes a side-show freak instead of the supreme Person who deserves our highest reverence. If people are allowed to describe God at whim, most any image could appear.
Furthermore, to add "and Mother" when referring to God the Father, has (at some places) an awkward implication. For example, in the NCC translation of John 15:26, Jesus promises "the Spirit of truth who proceeds from [God] the Father [and Mother].- This seems to add a heretical Fourth Person to the Trinity.
Is the controversy surrounding the God-language debate more serious than most people are willing to admit? I think the evidence is mounting that what is happening in the church is not simply a change in language, but a change in faith.
In conclusion then, it is not a serious infraction of good judgment to try and eliminate an overuse of the male pronouns when speaking of people. The pronoun "he" has long been used in our English language to include both men and women. We say, "A school student must study his lessons if he expects to pass the test." The statement refers to boys and girls who are students in school. Such a use of the masculine pronoun "he" is acceptable, but to re-word the sentence so as to limit the use of the masculine pronoun is certainly proper. Instead of saying, "The average American drinks his coffee black," we can say, "The average American drinks black coffee." And in the Bible, minor editorial changes which avoid overusing the male pronoun can be a healthy improvement in translation. Instead of, "If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in" (Revelation 3:20), it is not offensive to say, "if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in" (as translated in the New International Version).
The real concern, which Christians like myself have, have arises out of the dangers which surface when attempts are made to re-write the language pertaining to God.
Honestly, as well meaning as some of the people in the inclusivist camp may be, I believe the strong endeavor at language change as another in a long list of attempts to undermine the authority and finality of the Word of God. Tinkering with the Bible's words cannot be done without changing the Bible's message. Sometimes I wonder if those who are so unhappy with God as Father are really satisfied with Him as God at all.
More Questions…
Does anybody really feel left outside God's offer of salvation and grace because the words do not always specifically refer to all genders? Must "children" and "boys and girls" always be mentioned along with grownups for them to know that they are not excluded from God's plan? Are there really some women and girls who honestly believe that the use of male terms or masculine pronouns in Holy Scripture has barred them from the promises of God?
For some time it has been quite evident that there are those working diligently to perform a major sex-change operation on the Bible's language. This is a high-priority agenda item for some people. And although I believe the trend toward inclusive language is not all bad, I believe it has gone too far. And the "too far" for us has to do primarily with the attempt to eliminate all male references to the God of Scripture.
Some Inclusivist Examples:
In our day, the feminist critics are calling for a number of word changes that would make our language more inclusive of men and women. It is true that there have been some biases built into the words and phrases that are commonly used in church circles. It is not always helpful, for example, to refer to a congregation as "men" or "brethren." In sensitivity to other persons, we can make an effort to be inclusive. We do not object to using the phrase "men and women" (instead of "men") when referring to people, nor is it offensive to speak of "chairpersons" instead of chairmen," or to say "mail carrier" instead of mailman."
It is okay with most people to say that "utility men" are "utility persons" and that "manholes" are "person holes." It doesn't bother most of us if inspectors want to work in "sewer holes" instead of "manholes." And certainly all of us should intentionally avoid use of stereotypes such as 11 woman driver" or "scatterbrained female." However, the present-day discussion in church circles is not primarily concerned with typical references to people. The more serious concern centers around language which is used in reference to God.
There are groups within our churches that call for widening the terms used for God so that the language includes female images of God. They want all exclusive male references to God removed from the Bible. The language and wordpictures used in the Bible, they say, must be changed. The National Council of Churches, for example, has prepared inclusive translations of Scripture passages for use in its Lectionaries. In the NCC-sponsored Inclusive Language Lectionary, language for people is changed to include women as well as men. For example, it can be helpful to translate "Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly" (Psalm 1:1) as "Blessed are those who walk not in the counsel of the ungodly" -and to render "Let your light shine before men" (Matthew 5:16), as "Let your light shine before others"--and to say, "Follow me and I will make you fishers of men and women," instead of the translation formerly used. But to change language about God (to speak of God as Father "and Mother," and Christ as "Child" of God) is unacceptable and can lead to some serious consequences, some of which I will briefly mention:
(a) God as Mother
The Scripture translations for the Inclusive Language add the words "and Mother" whenever there are references to God the Father. It is true that in several Old Testament texts, God is pictured as a woman giving birth, as a mother tending a small child, as a nursing mother, as a woman putting food and water on the table, etc. Christians down through the years have often referred to the motherly tenderness of God. It is true that in some ways God is like a mother-but God is never called "Mother." This is something significant. When we speak of God as "Father," we are including not only His fatherly (but also His motherly) qualities.
The word "Father" is the most distinctive name that Christians use for God. It is interesting to note that Muslims have 99 names for God (Protector, Provider, etc.), but not one of them is "Father." Christians have learned to use the name "Father" by following the example of Jesus; this was the name by which He knew God. Even as a boy, Jesus said, "Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business?" (Luke 2:49 NKJV). The last words of Jesus on the Cross were, "Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit" (Luke 23:46). When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, He said, "Say, Our Father who art in heaven." And it is dangerous for us to tamper with those words. The prayer begins with "Our Father," and goes on to say, "Hallowed be thy name." What name? The name which opens the prayer—" Father." To use the word "Father" when referring to God is simply to follow the example which Jesus set for us.
There is also a trend in hymnwriting that uses feminine imagery for God. British poet Brian Wren is a leader in the trend in hymnwriting. One of Wren's most controversial hymns is entitled "Strong Mother God." The hymn begins by calling God "Mother." Later verses address God as warm, father God; great, living God; old, aching God; and young, growing God." For the feminists, the hymn "God of our Fathers" becomes "God of the Ages." The line of another hymn is changed from "Like a loving father" to "Like a loving parent."
(b) Jesus as Lord
Inclusivists say that to sing songs like "The Church's One Foundation is Jesus Christ Our Lord"-is to use sexist language and is not sensitive to the concerns of women. They say that the Bible (with all its talk about "lords" and “kings") reflects an ancient feudal society which is not acceptable in our day.
The feminist critics find something grievously wrong with the beginning of the Twenty-third Psalm. The sentence "The Lord is my shepherd," they say, has a male-oriented sound, and so it is translated "God is my shepherd." In their view, no one is in a position of "lord" over another. The words of Sarah recorded in I Peter 3 make them cringe: "So once the holy women who hoped in God ... were submissive to their husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord" (I Peter 3:5-6, RSV). The word "lord" is a four-letter "no-no" in feminist thinking.
Dropping the term "Lord" (in reference to Jesus) is a serious departure from truth. Early Christians repeatedly declared that "Jesus is Lord.” This was in direct contradiction to the loyalties of citizens in the Mediterranean world. Citizens of the Roman Empire were required to declare that "Caesar is lord" (meaning that "Caesar is God")-and precisely because Christians confessed that Jesus is Lord, many early Christians lost their lives. They refused to bow their knee to Caesar. If we drop the word "Lord" (when referring to Jesus), we are in effect denying the totality of who Jesus is, and we are not giving due credit to the special relationship which Jesus has with the Father, who (along with the Holy Spirit) are one God manifest in three Persons.
In the new translations, Jesus is no longer "Son of God" or "Son of man," but He is now "Child of God" or "Human One." And the sentences are re-written so that the pronouns "he" and "him" do not appear. Thus, in the new translations, John 3:16 reads, "For God so loved the world that God gave God's only Child, that whoever believes in that Child should not perish, but have eternal life."
What’s the Result of All This?
What is behind all this call for change in language? Where might it eventually lead us? Since meaning is bound up in language and God has decided to reveal himself to us most directly in the form of words, surely one cannot change the language for God without altering his understanding of who God is.
The result of changing the description of God from "Father" to "Mother/ Father" is to create the picture of a partly male and partly female God. And to make Christ "the Child" instead of "the Son" is to picture Him as immature. To speak of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-as "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier"- may at first seem like an innocent change. But the terms "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" have a precise theological meaning which is not communicated by any other terms. The words "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier" are functional names (focusing on God's deeds), whereas "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" are names that focus on God's own essence and the nature of His being. There are a number of results that rise out of attempts to tamper with the names for God.
(a) Questions the Validity of Special Revelation
To believe that God is creator is self-evident; it is something which all religions believe and teach in some form or another. But to believe in God as Father is not self-evident; that belief comes to us especially through what Jesus tells us about God. In Matthew we read, "...no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him" (Matthew 11:27b, NIV).
(b) Takes Lightly the True Authority of Jesus
God is referred to as "Father" in twenty-five of the New Testament Books. Thus the teaching about God as "Father" is not an obscure doctrine.
Was Jesus wrong in telling us to pray to God by saying, "Our Father who art in heaven"? And if Jesus was wrong in teaching us to address God as "Father," He might be wrong about other things as well. To eliminate the word "Father" when referring to God is to deny that Jesus had any valid authority.
God is a deliberate God. He is not random or haphazard in his judgments. He is infinitely wise and sovereign. And if we believe so, we should believe and accept his revelation to us as "Father" as perfect and pleasing and acceptable.
(c) Diminishes God to the Level of the Mundane
To present God as "Mother and Father" is not only clumsy, but also repulsive to concerned Christians. God (when called "Mother and Father") becomes a side-show freak instead of the supreme Person who deserves our highest reverence. If people are allowed to describe God at whim, most any image could appear.
Furthermore, to add "and Mother" when referring to God the Father, has (at some places) an awkward implication. For example, in the NCC translation of John 15:26, Jesus promises "the Spirit of truth who proceeds from [God] the Father [and Mother].- This seems to add a heretical Fourth Person to the Trinity.
Is the controversy surrounding the God-language debate more serious than most people are willing to admit? I think the evidence is mounting that what is happening in the church is not simply a change in language, but a change in faith.
In conclusion then, it is not a serious infraction of good judgment to try and eliminate an overuse of the male pronouns when speaking of people. The pronoun "he" has long been used in our English language to include both men and women. We say, "A school student must study his lessons if he expects to pass the test." The statement refers to boys and girls who are students in school. Such a use of the masculine pronoun "he" is acceptable, but to re-word the sentence so as to limit the use of the masculine pronoun is certainly proper. Instead of saying, "The average American drinks his coffee black," we can say, "The average American drinks black coffee." And in the Bible, minor editorial changes which avoid overusing the male pronoun can be a healthy improvement in translation. Instead of, "If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in" (Revelation 3:20), it is not offensive to say, "if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in" (as translated in the New International Version).
The real concern, which Christians like myself have, have arises out of the dangers which surface when attempts are made to re-write the language pertaining to God.
Honestly, as well meaning as some of the people in the inclusivist camp may be, I believe the strong endeavor at language change as another in a long list of attempts to undermine the authority and finality of the Word of God. Tinkering with the Bible's words cannot be done without changing the Bible's message. Sometimes I wonder if those who are so unhappy with God as Father are really satisfied with Him as God at all.
More Questions…
Does anybody really feel left outside God's offer of salvation and grace because the words do not always specifically refer to all genders? Must "children" and "boys and girls" always be mentioned along with grownups for them to know that they are not excluded from God's plan? Are there really some women and girls who honestly believe that the use of male terms or masculine pronouns in Holy Scripture has barred them from the promises of God?
Friday, May 4, 2007
Watch Your Toes . . .
Have you ever considered what Satan finds pleasurable?
1. When men of God abandon the preaching of the gospel to become "would be politicians" consumed with the political affairs of men.
2. When the preaching of God's Word is substituted with relational anecdotal experience, personal happiness programs, and human potentiality makeovers.
3. When pastors no longer shepherd God's people and the pulpits have become playgrounds.
4. When psychology has replaced biblical discipleship.
5. When men of God are flattered to become "late night talk show guests" on cultural and spiritual issues, but never once open up the Bible to develop their answers; or call the nation, other guests, or the talk show host to repentance by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation; they've simply become culturally acceptable biblical motivational speakers thinking that access to mainstream media means they are making an impact.
6. When the vicar of Rome is acknowledged as the vicar of Christ.
7. When sin is called sickness; when disobedience is called disease; and when adultery is called addiction.
8. When money becomes a prerequisite for ministry by charging people for the gospel, worship, discipleship, counseling, evangelism, Christian music, etc.
9. When we are liked by all people; when the world is not offended by the message we represent and relates to us for being "nice".
10. When church becomes just another predictable program we do one hour a week, one day a week.
11. When prayer becomes passé and the seldom thing we do.
12. When brothers and sisters hold ought against each other in bitterness and unforgiveness.
13. When church discipline of sin ceases.
14. When irreconcilable differences becomes an acceptable reason to break the covenant of marriage.
15. When the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but happiness.
16. When the object of faith is no longer Christ, but self.
17. When the foundation of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but my personal experience.
18. When error is tolerated and finally accepted as truth.
19. When Christians partner with nonbelievers in the work of the ministry.
20. When ministries are enticed to give up their autonomy and become owned by the world for just a little more money and a little more personal promotion.
21. When the worship and glory of God is treated as entertainment.
22. When the church bowes the knee to the seminaries and surrenders her duty to train men for pastoral ministry; thinking that the academic schools of religious learning actually can make a pastor when all they can do is make students.
23. When men can personally profit from the sale of God's Word.
24. When repentance is no longer part of the gospel.
25. When salvation is no longer proclaimed as being by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone, on the Word alone, to the glory of God alone.
26. When Romanism, Mormonism, Jehovah Witnesses, Church of Christ (Bostonian), Seventh Day Adventists (and dare I say but to be consistent I must) Islamic moralists, Atheists, Agnostics, etc. are indirectly legitimized as being "morally sound and culturally chaste" by some naïve evangelical leaders who have forgotten their heritage, sold their spiritual birthright, and have laid down sound doctrine for the sole purpose of partnering with those same "religious" and individually politically-correct alliances to try and turn back the tide of social ills through cultural cobelligerence. In doing so, they have purposely divorced the centrality of the gospel of Jesus Christ from their burden for social change; this is foolish and the delight of hell.
27. When the offense of the cross is removed for cultural acceptance, media accessibility and endorsement
Distributed by www.ChristianWorldviewNetwork.com
1. When men of God abandon the preaching of the gospel to become "would be politicians" consumed with the political affairs of men.
2. When the preaching of God's Word is substituted with relational anecdotal experience, personal happiness programs, and human potentiality makeovers.
3. When pastors no longer shepherd God's people and the pulpits have become playgrounds.
4. When psychology has replaced biblical discipleship.
5. When men of God are flattered to become "late night talk show guests" on cultural and spiritual issues, but never once open up the Bible to develop their answers; or call the nation, other guests, or the talk show host to repentance by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation; they've simply become culturally acceptable biblical motivational speakers thinking that access to mainstream media means they are making an impact.
6. When the vicar of Rome is acknowledged as the vicar of Christ.
7. When sin is called sickness; when disobedience is called disease; and when adultery is called addiction.
8. When money becomes a prerequisite for ministry by charging people for the gospel, worship, discipleship, counseling, evangelism, Christian music, etc.
9. When we are liked by all people; when the world is not offended by the message we represent and relates to us for being "nice".
10. When church becomes just another predictable program we do one hour a week, one day a week.
11. When prayer becomes passé and the seldom thing we do.
12. When brothers and sisters hold ought against each other in bitterness and unforgiveness.
13. When church discipline of sin ceases.
14. When irreconcilable differences becomes an acceptable reason to break the covenant of marriage.
15. When the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but happiness.
16. When the object of faith is no longer Christ, but self.
17. When the foundation of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but my personal experience.
18. When error is tolerated and finally accepted as truth.
19. When Christians partner with nonbelievers in the work of the ministry.
20. When ministries are enticed to give up their autonomy and become owned by the world for just a little more money and a little more personal promotion.
21. When the worship and glory of God is treated as entertainment.
22. When the church bowes the knee to the seminaries and surrenders her duty to train men for pastoral ministry; thinking that the academic schools of religious learning actually can make a pastor when all they can do is make students.
23. When men can personally profit from the sale of God's Word.
24. When repentance is no longer part of the gospel.
25. When salvation is no longer proclaimed as being by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone, on the Word alone, to the glory of God alone.
26. When Romanism, Mormonism, Jehovah Witnesses, Church of Christ (Bostonian), Seventh Day Adventists (and dare I say but to be consistent I must) Islamic moralists, Atheists, Agnostics, etc. are indirectly legitimized as being "morally sound and culturally chaste" by some naïve evangelical leaders who have forgotten their heritage, sold their spiritual birthright, and have laid down sound doctrine for the sole purpose of partnering with those same "religious" and individually politically-correct alliances to try and turn back the tide of social ills through cultural cobelligerence. In doing so, they have purposely divorced the centrality of the gospel of Jesus Christ from their burden for social change; this is foolish and the delight of hell.
27. When the offense of the cross is removed for cultural acceptance, media accessibility and endorsement
Distributed by www.ChristianWorldviewNetwork.com
Friday, April 20, 2007
The Bible-believing, truth-driven, soul-winning, hard-working, Calvinistic Baptist preacher who changed the world one sermon at a time.
Charles Haddon Spurgeon died on January 31st 115 years ago at the age of 57 after preaching for 38 years at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. My life has been greatly impacted by the sermons of C.H. Spurgeon and my soul has been deeply inspired by the strength he displayed during the course of his tumultuous life. It is a fortunate thing that I have the oppurtunity to study godly men like Spurgeon.
If there were anything to know about Charles Spurgeon, it was that he was a preacher. He preached over 600 times before he was 20 years old! His sermons sold about 20,000 copies a week and were translated into 20 languages. The collected sermons fill 63 volumes equivalent to the 27 volume ninth edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, and stands as the largest set of books by a single author in the history of Christianity.
There is no preacher this side of the Reformation I would more highly recommend you read.
Here are some select quotes from the pen of Charles Spurgeon:
Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. To know is not to be wise. Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool. But to know how to use knowledge is to have wisdom.
We are all at times unconscious prophets.
The greatest enemy to human souls is the self-righteous spirit which makes men look to themselves for salvation.
It is not how much we have, but how much we enjoy, that makes happiness.
I would go to the deeps a hundred times to cheer a downcast spirit. It is good for me to have been afflicted, that I might know how to speak a word in season to one that is weary.
By perseverance the snail reached the ark.
As sure as God puts His children in the furnace he will be in the furnace with them.
The anvil is not afraid of the hammer.
He that deserves nothing should be content with anything.
God had one Son without sin, but not a single child without the rod.
Our misery is that we thirst so little for these sublime things, and so much for the mocking trifles of time and space.
A lie travels round the world, while Truth is putting on her boots.
If we cannot believe God when circumstances seem to be against us, we do not believe Him at all.
Quietude, which some men cannot abide because it reveals their inward poverty, is as a palace of cedar to the wise, for along its hallowed courts the King in his beauty deigns to walk
Whatever may be said about the doctrine of election, it is written in the Word of God as with an iron pen, and there is no getting rid of it; there it stands.
I believe the man who is not willing to submit to the electing love and sovereign grace of God, has great reason to question whether he is a Christian at all, for the spirit that kicks against that is the spirit of the devil, and the spirit of the unhumbled, unrenewed heart.
No man ever made himself to live. No preacher, however earnest, can make one hearer to live. No parent, however prayerful, no teacher, however tearful, can make a child live unto God. “You hath HE quickened,” is true of all who are quickened.
I may be called a Calvinist for preaching a limited atonement; but I had rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than a universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of man be joined with it.
I take it that the highest proof of Christ’s power is not that he offers salvation, not that he bids you take it if you will, but that when you reject it, when you hate it, when you despise it, he has a power whereby he can change your mind, make you think differently from your former thoughts, and turn you from the error of your ways.
Final perseverance is the necessary evidence of genuine conversion.
If there were anything to know about Charles Spurgeon, it was that he was a preacher. He preached over 600 times before he was 20 years old! His sermons sold about 20,000 copies a week and were translated into 20 languages. The collected sermons fill 63 volumes equivalent to the 27 volume ninth edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, and stands as the largest set of books by a single author in the history of Christianity.
There is no preacher this side of the Reformation I would more highly recommend you read.
Here are some select quotes from the pen of Charles Spurgeon:
Wisdom is the right use of knowledge. To know is not to be wise. Many men know a great deal, and are all the greater fools for it. There is no fool so great a fool as a knowing fool. But to know how to use knowledge is to have wisdom.
We are all at times unconscious prophets.
The greatest enemy to human souls is the self-righteous spirit which makes men look to themselves for salvation.
It is not how much we have, but how much we enjoy, that makes happiness.
I would go to the deeps a hundred times to cheer a downcast spirit. It is good for me to have been afflicted, that I might know how to speak a word in season to one that is weary.
By perseverance the snail reached the ark.
As sure as God puts His children in the furnace he will be in the furnace with them.
The anvil is not afraid of the hammer.
He that deserves nothing should be content with anything.
God had one Son without sin, but not a single child without the rod.
Our misery is that we thirst so little for these sublime things, and so much for the mocking trifles of time and space.
A lie travels round the world, while Truth is putting on her boots.
If we cannot believe God when circumstances seem to be against us, we do not believe Him at all.
Quietude, which some men cannot abide because it reveals their inward poverty, is as a palace of cedar to the wise, for along its hallowed courts the King in his beauty deigns to walk
Whatever may be said about the doctrine of election, it is written in the Word of God as with an iron pen, and there is no getting rid of it; there it stands.
I believe the man who is not willing to submit to the electing love and sovereign grace of God, has great reason to question whether he is a Christian at all, for the spirit that kicks against that is the spirit of the devil, and the spirit of the unhumbled, unrenewed heart.
No man ever made himself to live. No preacher, however earnest, can make one hearer to live. No parent, however prayerful, no teacher, however tearful, can make a child live unto God. “You hath HE quickened,” is true of all who are quickened.
I may be called a Calvinist for preaching a limited atonement; but I had rather believe a limited atonement that is efficacious for all men for whom it was intended, than a universal atonement that is not efficacious for anybody, except the will of man be joined with it.
I take it that the highest proof of Christ’s power is not that he offers salvation, not that he bids you take it if you will, but that when you reject it, when you hate it, when you despise it, he has a power whereby he can change your mind, make you think differently from your former thoughts, and turn you from the error of your ways.
Final perseverance is the necessary evidence of genuine conversion.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Rob Bell and Hell
I just watched Rob Bell's Nooma video, "Bullhorn." In the video Rob is speaking out against Christians who stand on the street corner and use a bullhorn to tell people that they need to repent or they are going to burn in hell. Rob seems very concerned because people like this are misrepresenting God. He says Jesus never talked that way and that he would never do that. Rob talks about the centrality of love in Christianity. Loving those who are different than us and who don't believe the same thing as us. He says that when we do so, we are actually loving God. Agreed.
It seems to me that Rob is largely reacting to bad Christianity by presenting a half gospel. He's right about the centrality of love. He's right about the fact that some people on street corners don't seem to be loving. But it seems that Jesus really did believe in hell.
Jesus did warn people about hell. In Matthew 5:29-30, he said, "If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away, it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away, it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to go into hell."
I don't think our whole message should be hell-centered, or that we should use the bullhorn in an unloving way. But if hell is real, it seems like its incredibly important that we help people avoid it, in a loving way. I wish that we got to pick the doctrines of the Bible that were the most attractive to us and then those would be the ones that were true for us. Unfortunately, we didn't create the universe, we don't make the rules, and we can't be more loving than Jesus.
I came across this video response to Rob Bell's Bullhorn video. It was created by The Way of The Master Radio. I guess Kirk Cameron and friends have a different understanding of the gospel than Rob Bell and friends.
cc: post-methodist
It seems to me that Rob is largely reacting to bad Christianity by presenting a half gospel. He's right about the centrality of love. He's right about the fact that some people on street corners don't seem to be loving. But it seems that Jesus really did believe in hell.
Jesus did warn people about hell. In Matthew 5:29-30, he said, "If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away, it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away, it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to go into hell."
I don't think our whole message should be hell-centered, or that we should use the bullhorn in an unloving way. But if hell is real, it seems like its incredibly important that we help people avoid it, in a loving way. I wish that we got to pick the doctrines of the Bible that were the most attractive to us and then those would be the ones that were true for us. Unfortunately, we didn't create the universe, we don't make the rules, and we can't be more loving than Jesus.
I came across this video response to Rob Bell's Bullhorn video. It was created by The Way of The Master Radio. I guess Kirk Cameron and friends have a different understanding of the gospel than Rob Bell and friends.
cc: post-methodist
Jesus, Jack & Karl
Today is 24day.
Also known as the “Jack Bauer Power Hour”, or Monday, 24day is a national holiday and generally the best day in any self-respecting person’s week. For both of you reading this from some backwoods fundamentalist church who have not watched 24, there is still time for you to repent. The first 5 seasons are on DVD and you have time to catch up by the season’s end. But, be warned, you will be up all night like a crack addict wanting another fix and the odds are good that your entire April/May will be spent in your jammies staring at your television to finish up in time for the dramatic conclusion of season six.
All this adrenaline and excitement from 24 got me thinking about Karl Barth. Weird, I know. Just hear me out. Barth makes it explicit from the beginning that God is the unknowable and indescribable God. The hidden God remains hidden. Even when we say we know him our knowledge is of an imcomprehensible Reality. Consider, for instance, the personality of God. Barth writes: "God is personal, but personal in an incomprehensible way, in so far as the conception of his personality surpasses all our views of personality."
----24 is a television show, but a show in an incomprehensible way, in so far as the conception of its script surpasses all our views on television itself.
Barth also contends that even when God reveals himself to the man of faith, or, more accurately, to the man to whom he gives faith, still that man with faith "will confess God as the God of majesty and therefore as the God unknown to us. Man as man can never know God: His wishing, seeking, and striving are all in vain.
----24 is a show of majesty, known, yet utterly unknown. Man as man can never know 24: His wishing, seeking, and striving are all in vain. (WARNING: Patient endurance is necessary in watching 24 for any extended period of time)
On Romans 1:19, 20, Barth says: “We know that God is He whom we do not know, and that our ignorance is precisely the problem and the source of our knowledge. The Epistle to the Romans is a revelation of the unknown God; God chooses to come to man, not man to God. Even after the revelation man cannot know God, for he is ever the unknown God. In manifesting himself to man he is farther away than before.”
----Yes. You heard it right. 24 came to you. You did not choose to come to 24. Even after the first five seasons have been released on DVD and sixteen hours have passed by in season six, man cannot know 24. 24 is ever the unknowable show. In manifesting itself to man, it is farther away than before.
“The more we know of God the more he is yet to be known.”
----The more we know of 24, the more there is yet to be known.
“When attempts were later made to speak systematically about God and to describe His nature, men became more talkative. They spoke of God's aseity, His being grounded in Himself; they spoke of God's infinity in space and time, and therefore of God's eternity. And men spoke on the other hand of God's holiness and righteousness, mercifulness and patience. We must be clear that whatever we say of God in such human concepts can never be more than an indication of Him; no such concept can really conceive the nature of God. God is inconceivable.”
----No mortal can really conceive the nature of 24.
Below are some of my favorite Karl Barth quotes for your reading pleasure:
“The finite has no capacity for the Infinite.”
“There is no way from us to God. The god who stood at the end of some human way--even of this way--would not be God."
Also known as the “Jack Bauer Power Hour”, or Monday, 24day is a national holiday and generally the best day in any self-respecting person’s week. For both of you reading this from some backwoods fundamentalist church who have not watched 24, there is still time for you to repent. The first 5 seasons are on DVD and you have time to catch up by the season’s end. But, be warned, you will be up all night like a crack addict wanting another fix and the odds are good that your entire April/May will be spent in your jammies staring at your television to finish up in time for the dramatic conclusion of season six.
All this adrenaline and excitement from 24 got me thinking about Karl Barth. Weird, I know. Just hear me out. Barth makes it explicit from the beginning that God is the unknowable and indescribable God. The hidden God remains hidden. Even when we say we know him our knowledge is of an imcomprehensible Reality. Consider, for instance, the personality of God. Barth writes: "God is personal, but personal in an incomprehensible way, in so far as the conception of his personality surpasses all our views of personality."
----24 is a television show, but a show in an incomprehensible way, in so far as the conception of its script surpasses all our views on television itself.
Barth also contends that even when God reveals himself to the man of faith, or, more accurately, to the man to whom he gives faith, still that man with faith "will confess God as the God of majesty and therefore as the God unknown to us. Man as man can never know God: His wishing, seeking, and striving are all in vain.
----24 is a show of majesty, known, yet utterly unknown. Man as man can never know 24: His wishing, seeking, and striving are all in vain. (WARNING: Patient endurance is necessary in watching 24 for any extended period of time)
On Romans 1:19, 20, Barth says: “We know that God is He whom we do not know, and that our ignorance is precisely the problem and the source of our knowledge. The Epistle to the Romans is a revelation of the unknown God; God chooses to come to man, not man to God. Even after the revelation man cannot know God, for he is ever the unknown God. In manifesting himself to man he is farther away than before.”
----Yes. You heard it right. 24 came to you. You did not choose to come to 24. Even after the first five seasons have been released on DVD and sixteen hours have passed by in season six, man cannot know 24. 24 is ever the unknowable show. In manifesting itself to man, it is farther away than before.
“The more we know of God the more he is yet to be known.”
----The more we know of 24, the more there is yet to be known.
“When attempts were later made to speak systematically about God and to describe His nature, men became more talkative. They spoke of God's aseity, His being grounded in Himself; they spoke of God's infinity in space and time, and therefore of God's eternity. And men spoke on the other hand of God's holiness and righteousness, mercifulness and patience. We must be clear that whatever we say of God in such human concepts can never be more than an indication of Him; no such concept can really conceive the nature of God. God is inconceivable.”
----No mortal can really conceive the nature of 24.
Below are some of my favorite Karl Barth quotes for your reading pleasure:
“The finite has no capacity for the Infinite.”
“There is no way from us to God. The god who stood at the end of some human way--even of this way--would not be God."
Friday, March 30, 2007
Song of the Year
The band All Star United has released some good and fun songs over the years. Unfortunately I've sometimes found them to toe the line a little bit with their humor. On the whole, though, they write some memorable songs and songs that tend to speak to some of the trends in the Christian world. They have an album coming out in a few weeks and one of the songs is called "Song of the Year." Written by Ian Eskelin, who does most of all of the band's writing, it pokes fun at the trend of handing out awards for the best worship music. Here is a portion of the lyrics:
This is the song of the year
Let the message be clear
I don't need you to adore me
Cause it's all about God's glory
Something's gone really wrong
If we're chasing the song of the year
Testimony TestimonyTestimony Testimony
I'll never be the same
Holy holy worthy worthy
something something something something
That rhymes with Jesus' name
It's the song of the year
But God's still unimpressed
With our radio success
This is the song of the year
Let the message be clear
I don't need you to adore me
Cause it's all about God's glory
Angel choirs sing along
If it's really the song of the year.
This is the song of the year
Let the message be clear
I don't need you to adore me
Cause it's all about God's glory
Something's gone really wrong
If we're chasing the song of the year
Testimony TestimonyTestimony Testimony
I'll never be the same
Holy holy worthy worthy
something something something something
That rhymes with Jesus' name
It's the song of the year
But God's still unimpressed
With our radio success
This is the song of the year
Let the message be clear
I don't need you to adore me
Cause it's all about God's glory
Angel choirs sing along
If it's really the song of the year.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Jesus In A Pink Dress Overlooking The Grateful Dead, Part 1
At St. Louis' Mardi Gras celebration this year I found myself "missionally" checking out a Grateful Dead cover band. The venue was an old church in the process of being converted into a bar. The massive crowd, pushing and squeezing through the double doors longed not to hear about Jesus but "the Dead." "Hey, ya wanna take a shot," I was asked the moment I walked in. I declined. I'm too holy for "shots." As a devout Bible-thumping Jesus freak I pondered how this church became a bar? Then I saw it! I looked up and thought that maybe the church's death had something to do with the huge, pathetic mural of a sandy brown-haired Jesus wearing a pink dress.
Actually, it was a robe, but pink nonetheless. Seriously, in the mural Jesus was extending a slightly bent arm with a warm, soft hand to rescue Peter from drowning after failing to walk on water (Matthew 14:22-33). However, Peter's arms and forearms were ripped like a Muscle and Fitness magazine cover model in need of a steroid detox program. Peter, another white dude, was a lot more masculine than Jesus. I didn't know that.
Why was Jesus a blonde-haired white guy wearing a pink dress?
The cornerstone of the church building read "Gravois Avenue Church of God, December 13, 1942." Sadly, some 65 years later the building was now packed full of alcohol abusing, weed-loving, sexually liberated "Dead-heads," surrounded by 6 Jesus freaks (me and my friends), listening to incredible musicians.
Will your church devolve into a music venue for cover bands in two generations?
I don't know which was worse the effeminate pink-dressed Jesus or the fact that this church is now a music venue that served cheap beer. At one point I wanted to interrupt the show, grab a microphone, and start preaching (like a good "bullhorn guy"): "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is near! Hell is knocking at your door!" But then I realized that behind me would have been Jesus wearing a pink dress.
After my short sermon one of those hippie guys could have retorted, "Hey, Mr. black-guy-listening-to-Grateful-Dead-music-with-the-rest-of-us, the Kingdom of God is led by a dude in a pink dress?" The answer, of course, is "NO!!" The kingdom of God is led by a man who battled Satan and secured victory for his people (Matt. 10:34; 1 John 3:8).
Leon Podles, is his book, The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity, laments the feminized Christianity of the pink-dressed Jesus: "Christianity is now seen as a part of the sphere of life proper to women rather than to men, it sometimes attracts men whose own masculinity is doubtful. By this I do not mean homosexuals . . . rather religion is a safe field, a refuge from the challenges of life and therefore attracts men who are fearful of making a break with the secure world of childhood dominated by women. These are men who have problems following the path of masculine development."
Maybe this church died because the men had no mission? They were never initiated into the masculine image of Christ and therefore never entered into the battle of local mission.
David Murrow, author of Why Men Hate Going To Church, reminds us that 61% of the average adult U.S. church attendance is women, 80% of attendees at midweek church activities are women, and 90% of boys raised in the church will abandon it by time they turn 20-years-old.
If you combine the image of Jesus in a pink dress with the soft-spoken, effeminate "sharing" that some churches call "sermons" by preachers/teachers who sound like one of the Teletubbies having confused words like "meek" and "gentle" with androgeny, we may understand how churches become bars: churches without the Gospel, and God-made masculine men, eventually die.
Pastor Teletubby stands up on Sunday in a quiet, non-offensive voice, whispering pink platitudes, after people sing a love ballad or two to a pink-dressed Jesus, instead of preaching the hard, painful, inviting, comforting, electrifying, liberating, convicting, offensive, loud, unraveling, authentic, transforming, truth of the Gospel of Jesus who alone empowers and enables his people to fight in the ancient redemptive mission of God to redeem the whole creation.
"Men are looking for a real man to follow: dynamic, outspoken, bold, sharp-edged. They want a leader who is decisive, tough, and fair. They respect a man who tells it like it is and doesn't mince words, even when it makes them mad. Men most respect a leader who doesn't care what others think of him," says Murrow. Satan is real, hell is real, people are dying, sin is alive, repentance is needed, healing is necessary and people need a Jesus who bears a sword and fights for them and men pursuing death for the same cause.
Pastor Teletubby, offering a pink-dressed Jesus, is not capable of leading a church into the gloriously dangerous sufferings of Gospel-driven local mission advancing the Kingdom of God "wherever the curse is found." More to come. . .
http://theresurgence.com/ab_blog_2007-02-08_jesus_in_a_pink_dress_part_1Thursday, February 15, 2007
Therapeutic Theology: Part 3
What Should We Do: Teach Sound Doctrine (continued)
The Doctrine of Sin (Includes the Doctrine of Man)
"Dim or indistinct views of sin are the origin of most of the errors, heresies and false doctrines of the present day... I believe that one of the chief wants of the church in the nineteenth century has been, and is, a clearer, fuller, teaching about sin." - J.C. Ryle, Holiness
"Christianity doesn't make sense without sin. If we are not sinners, turned away from God, then there was no reason for God to become a man, and no reason for Him to die. Our slavery to sin is the thing that Christ came to free us from. That is the most fundamental Christian belief. If follows that if you have no consciousness of
sin, you simply won't be able to see the point of Christianity... Now it is possible to create a climate in which people have very little sense of sin and therefore, little chance of comprehending what Christianity is all about. We know it is possible because that is the climate that exists today." - William Kirk Kilpatrick, Psychological Seduction: The Failure of Modern Psychology
"The subject of sin is vital knowledge. To say that our first need in life is to learn about sin may sound strange, but in the sense intended it is profoundly true. If you have not learned about sin, you cannot understand yourself, or your fellow-men, or the world you live in, or the Christian faith. And you will not be able to make head or tail of the Bible. For the Bible is an exposition of God's answer to the problem of human sin, and unless you have that problem clearly before you, you will keep missing the point of what it says. Apart from the first two chapters of Genesis, which set the stage, the real subject of every chapter of the Bible is what God does about our sins. Lose sight of this theme, and you will lose your way in the Bible at once. With that, the love of God, the meaning of salvation, and the message of the gospel, will all become closed books to you; you may still talk of these things, but you will no longer know what you are talking about. It is clear, therefore, that we need to fix in our minds what our ancestors would have called 'clear views of sin.'" - J.I. Packer, God's Words
a. A clear view of sin is necessary and critical for understanding and appreciating justification.
"The plain truth is that a right knowledge of sin lies at the root of all saving Christianity. Without it such doctrines as justification, conversion, sanctification, are `words and names' which convey no meaning to the mind." - J.C. Ryle, Holiness
[The greatest need we all have isn't one we naturally are aware of or normally feel.]
"In today's world there is little emphasis on the biblical doctrine of sin... But a person with a shallow sense of sin and of the wrath of God against our sin will neither feel the need for nor understand the biblical doctrine of
justification." - Hoekema, Saved by Grace
"It must even be said that our evangelical emphasis on the atonement is dangerous if we come to it too quickly. We learn to appreciate the access to God which Christ has won for us only after we have first seen God's inaccessibility to sinners. We can cry `Hallelujah' with authenticity only after we have first cried, `Woe is me, for I am lost.'" - John R.W. Stott, The Cross of Christ
"It is partly because sin does not provoke our own wrath that we do not believe that sin provokes the wrath of God." - John R.W. Stott, The Cross of Christ
[It is only when we are aware of wrath that we appreciate grace. To appreciate grace one must understand the seriousness of sin and be convinced he is worthy of wrath and incapable of altering this condition apart form faith in the person and finished work of Jesus Christ.Ignorance of this is why so many are insecure and unsure of God's love. And the fact that our teaching about self-esteem has replaced the doctrine of sin today.
(1) The proponents of self-esteem often have a very superficial view of sin.
(2) The result is that one is misled into thinking that Christ's death is primarily a manifestation of our value to and before God.
(3) We were worthy, but only of His wrath.]
"The cross reveals the depth of our sin, not the height of our worth before God." - Michael Scott Horton, Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?
"I have often heard it said, `If I had been the only person on the earth, Jesus would still have died for me.' Although our Lord could have given His life for just one person, it most certainly would not have been because that person was so valuable, but because God was so gracious. Such an occurrence should hardly, therefore, be regarded as a source of pride or self-esteem. For me to argue that Jesus would have died for me if I were the only person on the earth simply indicates that my sins alone, without the rest of you contributing your share, were sufficient to demand the severe punishment Jesus Christ vicariously assumed in my place. When faced with that reality, we ought to weep for the selfless sacrifice of our Lord instead of finding in it one more opportunity for feeling good about ourselves." - Michael Scott Horton, Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?
The Doctrine of Sin (Includes the Doctrine of Man)
"Dim or indistinct views of sin are the origin of most of the errors, heresies and false doctrines of the present day... I believe that one of the chief wants of the church in the nineteenth century has been, and is, a clearer, fuller, teaching about sin." - J.C. Ryle, Holiness
"Christianity doesn't make sense without sin. If we are not sinners, turned away from God, then there was no reason for God to become a man, and no reason for Him to die. Our slavery to sin is the thing that Christ came to free us from. That is the most fundamental Christian belief. If follows that if you have no consciousness of
sin, you simply won't be able to see the point of Christianity... Now it is possible to create a climate in which people have very little sense of sin and therefore, little chance of comprehending what Christianity is all about. We know it is possible because that is the climate that exists today." - William Kirk Kilpatrick, Psychological Seduction: The Failure of Modern Psychology
"The subject of sin is vital knowledge. To say that our first need in life is to learn about sin may sound strange, but in the sense intended it is profoundly true. If you have not learned about sin, you cannot understand yourself, or your fellow-men, or the world you live in, or the Christian faith. And you will not be able to make head or tail of the Bible. For the Bible is an exposition of God's answer to the problem of human sin, and unless you have that problem clearly before you, you will keep missing the point of what it says. Apart from the first two chapters of Genesis, which set the stage, the real subject of every chapter of the Bible is what God does about our sins. Lose sight of this theme, and you will lose your way in the Bible at once. With that, the love of God, the meaning of salvation, and the message of the gospel, will all become closed books to you; you may still talk of these things, but you will no longer know what you are talking about. It is clear, therefore, that we need to fix in our minds what our ancestors would have called 'clear views of sin.'" - J.I. Packer, God's Words
a. A clear view of sin is necessary and critical for understanding and appreciating justification.
"The plain truth is that a right knowledge of sin lies at the root of all saving Christianity. Without it such doctrines as justification, conversion, sanctification, are `words and names' which convey no meaning to the mind." - J.C. Ryle, Holiness
[The greatest need we all have isn't one we naturally are aware of or normally feel.]
"In today's world there is little emphasis on the biblical doctrine of sin... But a person with a shallow sense of sin and of the wrath of God against our sin will neither feel the need for nor understand the biblical doctrine of
justification." - Hoekema, Saved by Grace
"It must even be said that our evangelical emphasis on the atonement is dangerous if we come to it too quickly. We learn to appreciate the access to God which Christ has won for us only after we have first seen God's inaccessibility to sinners. We can cry `Hallelujah' with authenticity only after we have first cried, `Woe is me, for I am lost.'" - John R.W. Stott, The Cross of Christ
"It is partly because sin does not provoke our own wrath that we do not believe that sin provokes the wrath of God." - John R.W. Stott, The Cross of Christ
[It is only when we are aware of wrath that we appreciate grace. To appreciate grace one must understand the seriousness of sin and be convinced he is worthy of wrath and incapable of altering this condition apart form faith in the person and finished work of Jesus Christ.Ignorance of this is why so many are insecure and unsure of God's love. And the fact that our teaching about self-esteem has replaced the doctrine of sin today.
(1) The proponents of self-esteem often have a very superficial view of sin.
(2) The result is that one is misled into thinking that Christ's death is primarily a manifestation of our value to and before God.
(3) We were worthy, but only of His wrath.]
"The cross reveals the depth of our sin, not the height of our worth before God." - Michael Scott Horton, Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?
"I have often heard it said, `If I had been the only person on the earth, Jesus would still have died for me.' Although our Lord could have given His life for just one person, it most certainly would not have been because that person was so valuable, but because God was so gracious. Such an occurrence should hardly, therefore, be regarded as a source of pride or self-esteem. For me to argue that Jesus would have died for me if I were the only person on the earth simply indicates that my sins alone, without the rest of you contributing your share, were sufficient to demand the severe punishment Jesus Christ vicariously assumed in my place. When faced with that reality, we ought to weep for the selfless sacrifice of our Lord instead of finding in it one more opportunity for feeling good about ourselves." - Michael Scott Horton, Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?
Therapeutic Theology: Part 2
What Should We Do: Teach Sound Doctrine.
The Doctrine of God
[The biblical writers begin with God. So must we. Popular literature and teaching today begins with man and then proceeds to make God in our image according to our preference.]
"Again, it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God's face, and then descends from contemplating him to scrutinize himself." - John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion
[Apart from an accurate understanding of God's nature and character, idolatry and error are inevitable.]
In his book, A Call To Spiritual Reformation, D.A. Carson begins by asking the following question, " What is the most urgent need in the church of the Western world today?"
"People are starving for the greatness of God. But most of them would not give this diagnosis of their troubled lives. The majesty of God is an unknown cure. There are far more popular prescriptions on the market, but the benefit of any other remedy is brief and shallow... It does not matter if surveys turn up a list of perceived needs that does not include the supreme greatness of the sovereign God of grace. That is the deepest need. Our people are starving for God." - John Piper, The Supremacy of God in Preaching
Jer. 2:13 says, "My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken Me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water."
Jer. 6:16 says, "Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls."
"The Church has surrendered her once lofty concept of God and has substituted for it one so low, so ignoble, as to be utterly unworthy of thinking, worshiping men. This she has done not deliberately, but little by little and without her knowledge; and her very unawareness only makes her situation all the more tragic. The low view of God entertained almost universally among Christians is the cause of a hundred lesser evils everywhere among us. A whole new philosophy of the Christian life has resulted from this one basic error in our religious thinking." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God, Their Meaning in the Christian Life
[The greatest needs that exist today are for an accurate knowledge of God and for an experiential encounter with His greatness and goodness.]
"What comes to our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God, Their Meaning in theChristian Life
The Doctrine of God
[The biblical writers begin with God. So must we. Popular literature and teaching today begins with man and then proceeds to make God in our image according to our preference.]
"Again, it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God's face, and then descends from contemplating him to scrutinize himself." - John Calvin, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion
[Apart from an accurate understanding of God's nature and character, idolatry and error are inevitable.]
In his book, A Call To Spiritual Reformation, D.A. Carson begins by asking the following question, " What is the most urgent need in the church of the Western world today?"
"People are starving for the greatness of God. But most of them would not give this diagnosis of their troubled lives. The majesty of God is an unknown cure. There are far more popular prescriptions on the market, but the benefit of any other remedy is brief and shallow... It does not matter if surveys turn up a list of perceived needs that does not include the supreme greatness of the sovereign God of grace. That is the deepest need. Our people are starving for God." - John Piper, The Supremacy of God in Preaching
Jer. 2:13 says, "My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken Me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water."
Jer. 6:16 says, "Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls."
"The Church has surrendered her once lofty concept of God and has substituted for it one so low, so ignoble, as to be utterly unworthy of thinking, worshiping men. This she has done not deliberately, but little by little and without her knowledge; and her very unawareness only makes her situation all the more tragic. The low view of God entertained almost universally among Christians is the cause of a hundred lesser evils everywhere among us. A whole new philosophy of the Christian life has resulted from this one basic error in our religious thinking." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God, Their Meaning in the Christian Life
[The greatest needs that exist today are for an accurate knowledge of God and for an experiential encounter with His greatness and goodness.]
"What comes to our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God, Their Meaning in theChristian Life
Therapeutic Theology: Part 1
It may seem strange to us that Paul would devote several chapters to demonstrating the sinfulness of all people. We might think that he should get to the good news and camp there and help people see the good news as really good. That would feel more positive than lingering as long as he does over the sinfulness of man.
But there are probably some very profound reasons for this lingering over our sinfulness. I think of two at least. One is that the gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone simply does not land on us as overwhelmingly good news until we have some deeper sense of our sinfulness and hopelessness before God. The other reason Paul may draw out his demonstration of our sinfulness is that we are so resistant to seeing it and feeling it.
This is what I would call Therapeutic Theology and it is a pervasive problem in almost every evangelical institution in America today. Below are some quotes and assessments of the Therapeutic Theology issue. [My comments will be in brackets.]
"The recovery movement has taken not only America but evangelicalism by storm. In the form of Christian (and not so Christian) books, programs, small groups, and counseling centers, it represents the highest floodwater mark of the therapeutic on the church so far. Twelve-step this and that have been given the authority of the apostolic twelve themselves, and the result has been hailed as renewal.... The triumph of the therapeutic has finally transformed psychology from a mere discipline to a worldview and a way of life. Triumphing as a social revolution, the therapeutic has gained a self-evident status and a taken-for-granted cultural authority that is rarely questioned. "Diagnosis" and “therapy" are as obvious to twentieth-century Americans as "demons" and "witches" were to seventeenth-century Americans. In law they replaced crime and punishment. In religion they have replaced sin and redemption." - Os Guinness, No God But God: Breaking with the Idols of Our Age
"Evangelicalism is infatuated with psychotherapy." - John MacArthur, Jr., Our Sufficiency in Christ
It’s Popular. It’s Defective. It’s Erroneous.
"The overall story of pastoral care in the United States has been summed up as the shift from salvation to self-realization, made up of smaller shifts from self-denial to self-love to self-mastery, and finally to self-realization. The victory of the therapeutic over theology is therefore nothing less than the secularization and replacement of salvation." - Os Guinness, No God But God: Breaking with the Idols of Our Age
"Like medicine, biology, astronomy, and physics, psychology can collect observable data, but it cannot offer any insight into the ultimate questions. Those answers are found only in the kingdom of grace, only in the gospel, which itself is found only in the text of Holy Scripture." - Michael Scott Horton, Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?Why Has The Therapeutic Movement Become So Widely Accepted?
1. A theological deficiency among pastors.
2. The lack of respect for the competence of pastors and the unquestioned reverence for and deference to psychologists and psychiatrists.
3. The biblical illiteracy that characterizes the average Christian.
4. The attractiveness of the content.
5. The failure to build churches that are relationally strong.
"The triumph of the therapeutic is therefore partly a spur to the church and partly a judgment--a further example of the "unpaid bills of the church." - Os Guinness, No God But God: Breaking with the Idols of Our Age
What's The Problem: The Integration of Psychotherapy With Biblical Theology
"Whatever reconciliation I managed to effect between psychology and Christianity, however, was always at the expense of Christianity... True Christianity does not mix well with psychology. When you try to mix them, you often end up with a watered-down Christianity instead of a Christianized psychology. But the process is subtle and is rarely noticed. I wasn't aware that I was confusing two different things. And others in the church who might have been expected to put me right were under the same enchantment as I... These attempts to make common cause with psychology are examples of `Christianity And.' It's a strong temptation to those who fear that Christianity by itself isn't enough. The trouble is that `Christianity And' edges real Christianity aside or prevents it from taking hold." - William Kirk Kilpatrick, Psychological Seduction: The Failure of Modern Psychology
"But what we see today in so much of the literature and preaching of Christian pop psychology is not integration of biblical-theological and natural-scientific knowledge, but a replacement of biblical views of humans, God, and salvation with purely secular notions, baptized with non-contextual verses from the Bible." - Michael Scott Horton, ed., Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church?
Monday, February 5, 2007
Episcopalian Leadership: Disturbing
This blows my mind...
"Rough waters aren't new to Katharine Jefferts Schori, 52, a former oceanographer who is the Presiding Bishop-elect of the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. Bishop Katharine, as she's known, takes over a denomination rocked by controversy at home and abroad for its liberal stance on gay clergy. She talked with TIME's Jeff Chu about her mission of social justice, the relationship between science and religion and whether faith in Jesus is the only path to heaven."
[excerpts from the interview with TIME magazine]
What will be your focus as head of the U.S. church?
Our focus needs to be on feeding people who go to bed hungry, on providing primary education to girls and boys, on healing people with AIDS, on addressing tuberculosis and malaria, on sustainable development. That ought to be the primary focus.
(Is this the Gospel Jesus preached? This is the Good News of God unto salvation? What good is it for man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? Hmm...)
What is your view on intelligent design?
I firmly believe that evolution ought to be taught in the schools as the best witness of what modern science has taught us. To try to read the Bible literalistically about such issues disinvites us from using the best of recent scholarship.
(What? Apparently Bible-believing, Christian scholars who oppose the theory of evolution aren't quite up to par with the "best of recent scholarship".)
Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?
We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.
(I think Jesus may disagree with the Bishop on this one.)
*NOTE: In related news, the testosterone levels of male Americans has dropped significantly in the past twenty years.
"Rough waters aren't new to Katharine Jefferts Schori, 52, a former oceanographer who is the Presiding Bishop-elect of the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A. Bishop Katharine, as she's known, takes over a denomination rocked by controversy at home and abroad for its liberal stance on gay clergy. She talked with TIME's Jeff Chu about her mission of social justice, the relationship between science and religion and whether faith in Jesus is the only path to heaven."
[excerpts from the interview with TIME magazine]
What will be your focus as head of the U.S. church?
Our focus needs to be on feeding people who go to bed hungry, on providing primary education to girls and boys, on healing people with AIDS, on addressing tuberculosis and malaria, on sustainable development. That ought to be the primary focus.
(Is this the Gospel Jesus preached? This is the Good News of God unto salvation? What good is it for man to gain the whole world and lose his soul? Hmm...)
What is your view on intelligent design?
I firmly believe that evolution ought to be taught in the schools as the best witness of what modern science has taught us. To try to read the Bible literalistically about such issues disinvites us from using the best of recent scholarship.
(What? Apparently Bible-believing, Christian scholars who oppose the theory of evolution aren't quite up to par with the "best of recent scholarship".)
Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?
We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.
(I think Jesus may disagree with the Bishop on this one.)
*NOTE: In related news, the testosterone levels of male Americans has dropped significantly in the past twenty years.
Driscoll, Emerging Types, and Biblicist Theology
In a book entitled Listening to the Beliefs of the Emerging Churches, Mark Driscool writes a chapter concerning the emerging church and biblicist theology.
He writes,
"This chapter is my attempt to address three of the hottest theological issues in our day and to correct emerging error with biblical orthodoxy. As a devoted biblicist I am seeking to be as faithful to Scripture as possible, which explains the many Scripture references in this chapter.
I will explore what is arguably most distinctive about Christianity, namely the nature of God’s revelation, the nature of God, and the means by which God has chosen to save some sinners. The topics the publisher chose for this book are the essential elements of the Christian gospel according to the apostle Paul, who said that the second member of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, atones for our sins by his death and resurrection in fulfillment of the Scriptures."
Mark Driscoll is an important voice in the American church for our generation. I encourage you to look into this book and pray that the Lord continues to steel his heart and upholds him in faith and integrity.
You can read a excerpt of his chapter in PDF format here.
He writes,
"This chapter is my attempt to address three of the hottest theological issues in our day and to correct emerging error with biblical orthodoxy. As a devoted biblicist I am seeking to be as faithful to Scripture as possible, which explains the many Scripture references in this chapter.
I will explore what is arguably most distinctive about Christianity, namely the nature of God’s revelation, the nature of God, and the means by which God has chosen to save some sinners. The topics the publisher chose for this book are the essential elements of the Christian gospel according to the apostle Paul, who said that the second member of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, atones for our sins by his death and resurrection in fulfillment of the Scriptures."
Mark Driscoll is an important voice in the American church for our generation. I encourage you to look into this book and pray that the Lord continues to steel his heart and upholds him in faith and integrity.
You can read a excerpt of his chapter in PDF format here.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Tim Keller: A Great Inspiration
"The Bible's purpose is not so much to show you how to live a good life. The Bible's purpose is to show you how God’s grace breaks into your life against your will and saves you from the sin and brokenness otherwise you would never be able to overcome... religion is 'if you obey, then you will be accepted'. But the Gospel is, 'if you are absolutely accepted, and sure you’re accepted, only then will you ever begin to obey'. Those are two utterly different things. Every page of the Bible shows the difference."
A few days ago I posted a prayer by Tim Keller. The dude is a stud. I was priveleged to hear him speak at the 2006 DesiringGod National Conference, and he blew me away. Seeing his desire to spread the hope of the gospel in the inner-city was a great inspiration to me. I would encourage you to read or listen or blog as much as you can from Tim Keller.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Excluded by a Hobby: Voddie's Story
Voddie Bachaum writes:
I recently became aware of the fact that I am ineligible for leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention. I have not lost my eligibility due to personal sin, inadequate training, insufficient education, or lack of skill (all of which are routinely ignored). Nor have I gone off the deep end into theological liberalism. No, I have been rendered ineligible by my hobby! I fancy myself an amateur chef. As such, I regularly engage in practices that, as of June 14, 2006, render me (and thousands of others like me) persona non grata. Ironically, I have been rendered ineligible by many of the foods I enjoy. This may sound ridiculous, but a close look at the Greensboro resolution tells the tale.
RESOLVED, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.
While it looks harmless at first glance, this resolution is a powder keg. The resolution is fraught with careless wording, factual errors and saber rattling. In an attempt to uphold ‘righteousness’ the SBC may have slipped into legalism and irrelevancy. Moreover, it has disqualified many of us who don’t even drink!
Careless Wording
According to this wording, the SBC has rendered ineligible for leadership, any minister who “is a user of alcoholic beverages.” The wording of this line of the resolution is unfortunate. At best, this excludes anyone who has ever cooked (or eaten) Beer-battered shrimp, Shrimp scampi, Chicken or Veal saltimbocca, Chicken or Veal Marsala, risotto, and a number of soups and stews that are cooked with wine. Not to mention some of the very dishes served at the cafeteria during the convention in Greensboro. Why? because all of these dishes contain alcoholic beverages. Of course, by the time they are eaten almost all of the alcohol has been cooked off, nevertheless, those who cook the dishes, as well as those who eat them are guilty of ‘using alcoholic beverages.’
Factual Errors
According to the Greensboro resolution, “Years of research confirm biblical warnings that alcohol use leads to physical, mental, and emotional damage.” It is this kind of carelessness that has the rest of the world pointing and laughing. That is like saying, “Years of research confirm the biblical warnings that sex leads to physical, mental, and emotional damage.” While it is true that abusing alcohol (or sex) leads to physical, mental and emotional damage, research has shown that drinking in moderation may actually have health benefits (and sex actually makes babies). This fact is not lost on the writers of the Bible. In fact, Paul told Timothy “Don’t continue drinking only water, but use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses.” (1Tim. 5:23, HCSB) Thus, Timothy would have been disqualified from SBC leadership for obeying the Apostle’s teaching (but I digress). Had the resolution substituted ‘abuse’ for the word ‘use,’ the first whereas clause would have been accurate. As it stands, sex may be next.
Saber Rattling
My biggest problem with this resolution is the fact that it is a paper tiger. Not a single person at the Greensboro convention believes that SBC has a problem with alcoholism among its leaders. In fact, abstinence from alcohol is a given among Southern Baptist pastors. The few who do drink know that it would be professional suicide to do it in the open. But what about other requirements for leadership?
I would love to have seen the Convention debate a resolution on pastors with rebellious children, or dysfunctional homes. 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 both mention the abuse of alcohol. However, the same passages clearly state that a man with rebellious children, or a household that is not managed well is disqualified from leadership. I bet you $1 that any resolution promoting these clear, biblical mandates would die a quick death on the floor of the Convention… But that would be gambling. I’m already in enough trouble for my cooking. No worries, though, the resolution on actually practicing church discipline and removing members from our rolls didn’t even make it out of committee.
I recently became aware of the fact that I am ineligible for leadership in the Southern Baptist Convention. I have not lost my eligibility due to personal sin, inadequate training, insufficient education, or lack of skill (all of which are routinely ignored). Nor have I gone off the deep end into theological liberalism. No, I have been rendered ineligible by my hobby! I fancy myself an amateur chef. As such, I regularly engage in practices that, as of June 14, 2006, render me (and thousands of others like me) persona non grata. Ironically, I have been rendered ineligible by many of the foods I enjoy. This may sound ridiculous, but a close look at the Greensboro resolution tells the tale.
RESOLVED, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.
While it looks harmless at first glance, this resolution is a powder keg. The resolution is fraught with careless wording, factual errors and saber rattling. In an attempt to uphold ‘righteousness’ the SBC may have slipped into legalism and irrelevancy. Moreover, it has disqualified many of us who don’t even drink!
Careless Wording
According to this wording, the SBC has rendered ineligible for leadership, any minister who “is a user of alcoholic beverages.” The wording of this line of the resolution is unfortunate. At best, this excludes anyone who has ever cooked (or eaten) Beer-battered shrimp, Shrimp scampi, Chicken or Veal saltimbocca, Chicken or Veal Marsala, risotto, and a number of soups and stews that are cooked with wine. Not to mention some of the very dishes served at the cafeteria during the convention in Greensboro. Why? because all of these dishes contain alcoholic beverages. Of course, by the time they are eaten almost all of the alcohol has been cooked off, nevertheless, those who cook the dishes, as well as those who eat them are guilty of ‘using alcoholic beverages.’
Factual Errors
According to the Greensboro resolution, “Years of research confirm biblical warnings that alcohol use leads to physical, mental, and emotional damage.” It is this kind of carelessness that has the rest of the world pointing and laughing. That is like saying, “Years of research confirm the biblical warnings that sex leads to physical, mental, and emotional damage.” While it is true that abusing alcohol (or sex) leads to physical, mental and emotional damage, research has shown that drinking in moderation may actually have health benefits (and sex actually makes babies). This fact is not lost on the writers of the Bible. In fact, Paul told Timothy “Don’t continue drinking only water, but use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses.” (1Tim. 5:23, HCSB) Thus, Timothy would have been disqualified from SBC leadership for obeying the Apostle’s teaching (but I digress). Had the resolution substituted ‘abuse’ for the word ‘use,’ the first whereas clause would have been accurate. As it stands, sex may be next.
Saber Rattling
My biggest problem with this resolution is the fact that it is a paper tiger. Not a single person at the Greensboro convention believes that SBC has a problem with alcoholism among its leaders. In fact, abstinence from alcohol is a given among Southern Baptist pastors. The few who do drink know that it would be professional suicide to do it in the open. But what about other requirements for leadership?
I would love to have seen the Convention debate a resolution on pastors with rebellious children, or dysfunctional homes. 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 both mention the abuse of alcohol. However, the same passages clearly state that a man with rebellious children, or a household that is not managed well is disqualified from leadership. I bet you $1 that any resolution promoting these clear, biblical mandates would die a quick death on the floor of the Convention… But that would be gambling. I’m already in enough trouble for my cooking. No worries, though, the resolution on actually practicing church discipline and removing members from our rolls didn’t even make it out of committee.
Friday, January 19, 2007
Tim Keller's Prayer
"Lord Jesus Christ, I admit that I am weaker and more sinful than I ever before believed, but, through you, I am more loved and accepted than I ever dared hope. I thank you for paying my debt, bearing my punishment and offering forgiveness. I turn from my sin and receive you as Savior. Amen."
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Marketing Churchianity
Carl Trueman has a great post on Reformation21 concerning faith in the marketplace. Go read it now. You won't be disappointed.
Here's an excerpt:
"We can be Emergent and puff ourselves as the church's most trendy
and influential thinkers; we can be Reformed and puff ourselves
as the world's greatest and most eloquent preachers; we can be confessional and puff ourselves as the soundest and most theological church leaders around; but in doing so, indeed, in the very moment we do so, we can be sure of only one thing: we are not what we claim to be; rather, we are in fact the very opposite."
Here's an excerpt:
"We can be Emergent and puff ourselves as the church's most trendy
and influential thinkers; we can be Reformed and puff ourselves
as the world's greatest and most eloquent preachers; we can be confessional and puff ourselves as the soundest and most theological church leaders around; but in doing so, indeed, in the very moment we do so, we can be sure of only one thing: we are not what we claim to be; rather, we are in fact the very opposite."
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Mohawks on the Scaffold
by Andrew Peterson
Everybody’s gotta have a building program
Stacking that money up, brick on brick.
Oh, we’ve got to have praise team worship
14 services take your pick.
Everybody’s gotta have special music.
We don’t want dead air when the plate goes by.
Oh, it’s got to be a 3 point sermon
With a poem and a pun to break the ice.
Oh, the organ hit the D chord,
Its time to sing the doxology.
Stand up, praise the good Lord,
Please define “doxology”.
So now we take communion,
But first a word to prepare our heads.
Joe gets up and talks politics,
He says a prayer and we break the bread.
We take the cup and we quench our thirst,
Dismiss the children for children’s church,
Stand and greet your neighbor first,
Well every aspect is well rehearsed.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, praise the Lord, He's our buddy after all.
Oh, brother don’t get upset,
You see I’ve got my perfect attendance badge,
Sunday school and VBS,
I even pledged allegiance to the Christian flag.
(Which I have not to this day found anywhere in the Bible)
Oh, 4 years of Bible college.
Well I tucked my shirt and cut my hair,
No sister don’t get me wrong,
I learned a lot about Jesus there.
I went to class and I wore a tie.
I learned about who’s wrong and why.
Point the finger at the other guy
With the clearly flawed theologi.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's a puzzle that I've solved.
Yeah well I hope you’re pickin up my sarcasm
Cuz I’m layin’ it on pretty thick.
It’s a useful tool of communication
Even God himself as employed that trick.
So, if you’ll turn with me in your Bibles
To the book of Job, chapter 38,
It’ll remind us who we’re dealing with.
I hope you don’t mind if I paraphrase.
Sometimes it’s like we’re sleeping on an airbus,
Like we’re taking home a little bear cub,
Like hiking mount Vesuvius,
It’s like we’re cooking s’mores in the burning bush.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's so patient,
He’s so patient with us all.
Everybody’s gotta have a building program
Stacking that money up, brick on brick.
Oh, we’ve got to have praise team worship
14 services take your pick.
Everybody’s gotta have special music.
We don’t want dead air when the plate goes by.
Oh, it’s got to be a 3 point sermon
With a poem and a pun to break the ice.
Oh, the organ hit the D chord,
Its time to sing the doxology.
Stand up, praise the good Lord,
Please define “doxology”.
So now we take communion,
But first a word to prepare our heads.
Joe gets up and talks politics,
He says a prayer and we break the bread.
We take the cup and we quench our thirst,
Dismiss the children for children’s church,
Stand and greet your neighbor first,
Well every aspect is well rehearsed.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, praise the Lord, He's our buddy after all.
Oh, brother don’t get upset,
You see I’ve got my perfect attendance badge,
Sunday school and VBS,
I even pledged allegiance to the Christian flag.
(Which I have not to this day found anywhere in the Bible)
Oh, 4 years of Bible college.
Well I tucked my shirt and cut my hair,
No sister don’t get me wrong,
I learned a lot about Jesus there.
I went to class and I wore a tie.
I learned about who’s wrong and why.
Point the finger at the other guy
With the clearly flawed theologi.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's a puzzle that I've solved.
Yeah well I hope you’re pickin up my sarcasm
Cuz I’m layin’ it on pretty thick.
It’s a useful tool of communication
Even God himself as employed that trick.
So, if you’ll turn with me in your Bibles
To the book of Job, chapter 38,
It’ll remind us who we’re dealing with.
I hope you don’t mind if I paraphrase.
Sometimes it’s like we’re sleeping on an airbus,
Like we’re taking home a little bear cub,
Like hiking mount Vesuvius,
It’s like we’re cooking s’mores in the burning bush.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger,
Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall.
Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams,
Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's so patient,
He’s so patient with us all.
Irreverence in Our Church Protocol
I used to be the “Assistant Worship Director” at a church downtown. It was quite the experience. Before church started every week, we would have a little meeting with the pastor, the band, and all the tech guys (we had a video guy, a lyrics gal, and a sound guy – and an occasional lights guy). The conversation was centered on and revolved around the “order of worship”, who's doing what when, who’s saying what while standing where, etc. And invariably, there was the following exchange (or a reasonable facsimile thereof):
Pastor: Ok, do you want to pray at that point, or do you want me to?Band leader: It probably makes more sense as a transition for you to do it...Pastor: Sounds good. You come on up during the prayer. Lights?Lighting guy: Ok, I'll drop the lights when the prayer starts, so they'll be down when the band starts playing.
I always get a little fidgety at the point. I know that that stuff is important. I do. I understand that excellence in doing church includes being polished and ensuring smooth transitions, etc. But, when we start talking about prayer as a transition, it gets under my skin a little. It's a real struggle for me; it always feels like dangerous business.
And I'm reminded of a couple of things. The first is the story of Uzzah in 2 Samuel 6. When the Israelites, led by David, are taking the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, they don't follow God's instructions for how to transport it. And then, when the oxen pulling the cart stumble, and the ark starts to fall, Uzzah reaches out to stop it from falling. Verse 7 says, "The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; therefore God struck him down and he died there beside the ark of God." It's dangerous business, messing with the ark of God.
Andrew Peterson (who is awesome, by the way) uses an interesting metaphor. He's got a song called "Mohawks on the Scaffold" that compares the way we do church to the building of the first American skyscrapers and the legend that Indians were used to build the highest parts, because they weren't afraid of the heights. The chorus goes, "Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger/Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall/Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams/Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's a puzzle that I've solved."
So where's the line? When does the business of church cross into irreverence? When does being concerned with the atmosphere and the content of church become too much about the concern and not enough about the church? Does it even matter? Am I too sensitive? Is it just part of the deal?
In the Peterson song, when he does the chorus the last time, he ends it with "Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's so patient with us all."
Lord, I hope so.
Pastor: Ok, do you want to pray at that point, or do you want me to?Band leader: It probably makes more sense as a transition for you to do it...Pastor: Sounds good. You come on up during the prayer. Lights?Lighting guy: Ok, I'll drop the lights when the prayer starts, so they'll be down when the band starts playing.
I always get a little fidgety at the point. I know that that stuff is important. I do. I understand that excellence in doing church includes being polished and ensuring smooth transitions, etc. But, when we start talking about prayer as a transition, it gets under my skin a little. It's a real struggle for me; it always feels like dangerous business.
And I'm reminded of a couple of things. The first is the story of Uzzah in 2 Samuel 6. When the Israelites, led by David, are taking the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, they don't follow God's instructions for how to transport it. And then, when the oxen pulling the cart stumble, and the ark starts to fall, Uzzah reaches out to stop it from falling. Verse 7 says, "The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; therefore God struck him down and he died there beside the ark of God." It's dangerous business, messing with the ark of God.
Andrew Peterson (who is awesome, by the way) uses an interesting metaphor. He's got a song called "Mohawks on the Scaffold" that compares the way we do church to the building of the first American skyscrapers and the legend that Indians were used to build the highest parts, because they weren't afraid of the heights. The chorus goes, "Like Mohawks on the scaffold, heedless of the danger/Don't look down at the city, brother it's a long way to fall/Like Mohawks on the scaffold, strolling on the I-beams/Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's a puzzle that I've solved."
So where's the line? When does the business of church cross into irreverence? When does being concerned with the atmosphere and the content of church become too much about the concern and not enough about the church? Does it even matter? Am I too sensitive? Is it just part of the deal?
In the Peterson song, when he does the chorus the last time, he ends it with "Hallelujah, Praise the Lord, He's so patient with us all."
Lord, I hope so.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Songs of the Lukewarm Church
Do any of these sound familiar to you?
1. Blest Be the Tie That Doesn’t Cramp My Style
2. Pillow of Ages, Fluffed for Me
3. I Surrender Some
4. I’m Fairly Certain That My Redeemer Lives
5. Take My Life and Let Me Be
6. What An Acquaintance We Have In Jesus
7. Where He Leads Me, I Will Consider Following
8. He’s Quite a Bit To Me
9. Oh, How I Like Jesus
10. It Is My Secret What God Can Do
1. Blest Be the Tie That Doesn’t Cramp My Style
2. Pillow of Ages, Fluffed for Me
3. I Surrender Some
4. I’m Fairly Certain That My Redeemer Lives
5. Take My Life and Let Me Be
6. What An Acquaintance We Have In Jesus
7. Where He Leads Me, I Will Consider Following
8. He’s Quite a Bit To Me
9. Oh, How I Like Jesus
10. It Is My Secret What God Can Do
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
