Expository Thoughts

"Awesome Lawson"

2010-02-23T12:03:00.001-08:00

This year our church congregation is celebrating 165 years of God's faithfulness. One of the things we wanted to do to highlight this anniversary celebration was to have a bible conference or two. I am a bit of a dreamer so i decided to create my Fab 5 list of faithful expositors. Included on my list were John MacArthur, Steve Lawson, R.C. Sproul, Al Mohler, and John Piper. I have heard all these men preach in person many times before and have met all of them personally with the exception of Pastor Piper. Each one of these men has helped me grow in Christ and has modeled what a faithful pulpit looks like. I had the special privilege of being apart of Pastor MacArthur's church for 13 years. During that time I was able to enjoy some fellowship with Pastor Lawson on the Master's College campus.

Well to make a long story short i decided to ask Pastor Steve Lawson to be our key note preacher at our 165th Anniversary celebration not thinking we had much of a chance in getting him; as i told our leadership team, "Not because he would not love to serve us in this way but simply b/c national conference speakers are in very high demand and thus they have to say 'no' all the time." Well i was wrong! On May 21-22nd Pastor Steve Lawson will be coming to Freeport, Il and we could not be more excited!

When i heard Dr. Lawson preach in Orlando at a Ligonier Pastor's Conference i remember an African American preacher from Indiana say 'that Steve Lawson is awesome!' My dad and I decided to coin the expression used in the title above.

For those of you who wonder what it might have been like to hear George Whitefield preach....check out these sermons http://www.cfbcmobile.org

Steve Lawson is awesome because he gets himself out of the way every time he preaches and thus magnifies the glory of Christ in the Word of God!

A new home

2006-08-07T12:02:00.000-07:00

We have moved!! Please bookmark our new page which you can find here.

Thanks,
The Fellows of Expository Thoughts

Should people take notes during the sermon?

2006-08-01T07:15:00.000-07:00

Questioning tradition a bit at this point, I would like to pose a question which I am certainly not the first to ask. Other men from history are looking over my shoulder asking the same question and they have far more credibility and longevity than I do (e.g., Jonathan Edwards, Martyn Lloyd-Jones). Should we encourage our people to take notes during the sermon? Let me state at the outset that I do not think it a major issue either way. I would say that most expository preaching lends itself toward people taking notes as it is informational as well as exhortive preaching (as it should be). In our church, our men meet in weekly groups where they discuss last week’s sermon and seek to plunge the depths of application. The basis for their meetings is their notes from the last sermon. So personally speaking, I have seen the tremendous advantages of individuals taking notes while I preach.

However, in our media-driven age there is still an uncomfortable disconnect with modern forms of communication and the very old biblical task of public preaching. Ours is a generation driven by gobs of information and statistics which we have at a ready click (e.g., Google, Wikipedia) even if we’re not sure how such information should be processed. In fact, we have more bits of information at our disposal than ever before and yet we have few thinkers who are able to process this mass of media without the aid of a computerized algorithms. I believe such information age characteristics of knowledge accumulation have made their way into the congregations of churches that regularly dish out expository sermons. One response to such excess would be to scrap the expository sermon all together in favor of something lighter and more user-friendly but we can’t do this since 1) expository preaching is a biblical mandate 2) you would be wasting years of Greek and Hebrew study if you do something else and 3) you would reduce your ministry to scratching itching ears…just to name a few. Ridding ourselves of the method (i.e., expository) is not an option. So let’s hear some dissenting voices on taking notes before we decide what to do.

The first to truly emphasize such a point was Jonathan Edwards. George Marsden recounts Edwards saying, “The main benefit that is obtained by preaching is by impression made upon the mind in the time of it, and not by the effect that arises afterwards by a remembrance of what was delivered” (quoted in The Salvation of Souls, eds. Richard Bailey and Gregory Wills, 11). In a similar manner Martyn Lloyd-Jones followed Edwards noting, “The first and primary object of preaching is not only to give information. It is, as Edwards says, to produce an impression. It is the impression at the time that matters, even more than what you can remember subsequently….It is not primarily to impart information; and while you are writing your notes you may be missing something of the impact of the Spirit.”

So there are valid points to be made all around. Do you think Edwards and Jones made valid observations or do you think this is where they might have strayed in regards to application? What do we learn from both sides of the spectrum? Let us know what you think.

Shoo fly. . .shoo!

2006-07-31T11:10:00.000-07:00

I have deleted a few comments here because an individual by the name of "Antonio" is a peddler of false doctrine. Secondly, and I know this goes against the tone of most blogs, but this is not a “debate” blog. We might discuss items at times and kick thoughts around but we are not interested in being a billboard for false teachers to link to (besides Antonio has his own blog). I would ask that Antonio and any other’s of like ilk abstain from commenting here since such persons are always learning and never come to a knowledge of the truth. We are a group of friends who are all preachers and this blog is dedicated to such fellowship and conversation. In my year and a half of blogging I have learned that some people should be banned from owning computers and that the world has enough opinion to sustain a plethora of arguments for many more millennia (BTW: I also think turbans are out of style). Antonio, we will let you know if your services are needed here but by the looks of things, I think we will be okay without them until the Lord returns. Please show integrity and honor our requests not to comment here (consider yourself banned).

Oh and by the way….Jesus is Lord!

Applicational Hermeneutics (pt 4)

2006-07-31T07:21:00.000-07:00

*** V. The Biblical Solution ***

Here are "8 simple principles to help you accurately interpret (or apply) the Biblical text."

1. Pray that God through the Holy Spirit would grant you wisdom and understanding when studying or applying any passage of holy Scripture.

We can't do this in the flesh. We need to humble ourselves before God and ask for the Spirit's aid in understanding the Scriptures.

2. Utilize proper hermeneutics when studying or applying any passage of holy Scripture.

Pastor Flatt and I are both committed to the grammatico-historical method of interpretation (as are the writers of this blog). This method is designed “to discover the meaning of a text that is dictated by the principles of grammar and the facts of history.” The famous pre-reformation Reformer John Wycliffe wrote, “All things necessary in Scripture are contained in its proper literal and historical senses.” While the famous Bible translator William Tyndale said, “Scripture has but ones sense, which is the literal sense.” John Calvin rightly believed that, “The Holy Scripture is not a ball that we can bounce around at will. Rather it is the Word of God whose teaching must be learned by the most impartial and objective study of the text.” **When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.** Much more could be said under this heading but for time sake I must move on.

3. Try and leave behind any unnecessary presuppositions or preunderstandings when approaching the Text.

John Calvin wrote, “It is the first business of an interpreter to let his author say what he does say, instead of attributing to him what we think he ought to say.” St. Augustine adds, “The task of the interpreter is to determine the meaning of the Scriptures, not to bring a meaning to it.” Perhaps this is summarized most effectively in a quote by Bernard Ramm, “The danger of having a set theological system is that in the interpretation of Scripture the system tends to govern the interpretation rather than the interpretation correcting the system.”

4. Always remember, CONTEXT is KING!

Taking note of the context is essential for accurate bible study. KEY --►A proof text that ignores the context is a pretext! The Swiss reformer Zwingli wrote, “Pulling a passage of Scripture away from its context is like breaking a flower from its roots.” Context, context, context. In short, context is king!! Make sure you read a verse in its context (whether that means 1 paragraph or
6 chapters). This is one of the things that’s potentially dangerous during a discussion based setting (not having adequate time to study the contexts of the verses that are being referenced).

5. “Observe” what the Scriptural passage says.

Ask lots of questions of the text: Who was the writer? TO whom was he writing? Where does this passage fit in with the rest of the chapter? What genre of Scripture does this fit into? Are any words repeated? Are their any linking words? What grammatical devices does the author use? What are verb tenses in the original language? What are the key theological words? What’s the historical background of this passage? I remember one of my first seminary assignments was to take a short passage of Scripture and to come up with 20 questions to help implement this step.

6. Accurately “interpret” the biblical text.

This step asks the question, “What does it mean?” “How is it to be explained?” One seminary Professor notes, “Interpretation is perhaps the most difficult and time-consuming step.” Many preachers today don’t do in-depth Biblical exposition (expository preaching) because it is so laborious...

To help interpret the Text:
a) Find Solutions to all of your questions (the ones you came up with during the “observation” step)
b) Try to “Paraphrase” each verse or section of the passage… In my own words this means….
c) When interpreting the bible: Utilize the “analogy of the faith” rule- No passage of Scripture, when accurately understood will contradict any other passage.
d) When necessary, use clear passages of Scripture to help interpret more difficult (obscure) ones.
e) Use good exegetical commentaries only after you’ve done all these steps on your own.

(optional step) 7. Determine how this particular passage of Scripture harmonizes with other biblical texts/doctrines.
(Develop a biblical and systematic theology). Systematic and biblical theology is appropriate only after exegesis has taken place (of each passage)…

8. “Apply” the Biblical text to your own life.

Application takes place only after steps 1-6 are completed. If we immediately jump to application we are prone to misinterpret and misapply the Words of God. Remember there is but one true interpretation, but applications are many! The Spirit often applies the Word differently to individual believers. One scholar wrote, “Heart appropriation, not merely head apprehension, is the true goal of Bible study.” Study the Bible to know your God! Can you think of anything more glorious then growing closer with the God of the universe? This should be all the motivation we need to discipline ourselves in personal Bible study. We can grow in our relationship with Jesus through intense study and application of the Word!

I would encourage you to briefly review every sermon that you listen to and ask God to specifically apply the text to your life. Ask God to conform you into Christ’s image through your personal study and application of the Word (1 Peter 2:2). Always ask yourself the “so what?” questions. Knowledge alone merely puffs up.

Martin Luther wrote that the Bible, “is not merely to be repeated or known, but to be lived and felt.” In 1742, Johann Bengel wrote something that summarizes this lecture very well, “Apply yourself wholly to the text and apply the text wholly to yourself.”

Basic Bible Interpretation (pt 3)

2006-07-28T06:27:00.000-07:00

IV. The Need for this Particular Study

The Bible truly is God’s Word. As such, it is authoritative and binding for all peoples in all times (that’s why Satan hates it). He loves to undermine and minimize God's book. Throughout history, The Bible has been misinterpreted, thousands of times. Some people have done this intentionally while many more have done so unintentionally.

A) Some Atheists claim the Bible supports their position, after all Psalm 14:1 does say, “there is NO God.”

Of course the first part of the verse says, “The fool has said in his heart, there is NO God.”

B) Jehovah Witnesses and other cult groups say they believe in the Bible.

They quickly point out Colossians 1:15 which says, “Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation.” J.W.’s teach that Jesus is not eternal (He has an origin), thus He can’t be God. Of course a basic understanding of the original languages and the context of this particular passage clearly reveals what Paul was trying to say; Jesus is the “first-born” in this sense: He is preeminent in rank and supremacy over all His brethren. In addition, verse 16 claims Jesus was present when the universe was created (His eternality). This passage of Scripture does not destroy the Deity of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, it emphatically upholds it!

C) Roman Catholics often point out James 2:24 to show the apparent inconsistencies of Sola Fide (Justification by faith alone);

James 2:24 says, “You see that a man is justified by works, and NOT by faith alone.” Yet when this Epistle is understand in its historical setting, one realizes that James was attacking the errors of the Antinomians (cheap grace); Which is why he repeatedly emphasizes this concept: True saving faith works itself out in sanctification. A person is justified by faith alone BUT NOT by a faith that is alone (the evidence of our justification)!

D) Christians sometimes point out Matthew 7, which says “Judge not, least you be judged.”

This verse is used by some professing Believers to excuse sinful behavior. Others use it as an excuse not to faithfully confront people (after all who I am to judge?). But when understood in its entire context, Jesus is getting at a much different point. Jesus isn’t saying, “Don’t confront a sinning brother” what he is saying is “1st examine your own life(and make it right) BEFORE judging another person. The key word is found in verse 5, (circle the word), “THEN”………..

E) I’ve heard many Christians misapply Matthew 18:20, which says, “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst."

During scarcely attended prayer meetings someone will inevitably quote this verse in a earnest attempt to bring comfort to all that God is still in their midst (which of course He is). Unfortunately in context this verse is talking about the Lord’s presence (His confirmation) during the church discipline process NOT….

F) One person recorded this somewhat humorous example of how a pastor totally misapplied the Word of God during a Bible conference.

The speaker was preaching from John 11, the story of the resurrection of Lazarus. This was his interpretation, “Lazarus is a symbol of the church, and what we have here is a vivid picture of the rapture of the believers. The resurrection of Lazarus is the church going through the rapture.”

G) Some people try and handle poisonous snakes based on their reading of Mark 16:18 while others speak in tongues because the apostles did so in Acts 2.

-->One thing that’s essential is to recognize the difference between prescriptive and descriptive passages of Scripture.

H) A more common error today is perfectly described for us in a blog posting from a member of our church.

He writes, “I believe one of the key issues today regarding poor hermeneutics is our American tendency to 'need' the quick fix. We aren’t interested in hard-work and seeing the bigger picture; rather, we believe it is our right to have the solution presented to us in a clear/concise way. We want to believe the infomercials showing us how to become millionaires by age 30 or get great abs in 5 minutes a day. We want the maximum benefit with the least amount of work. For Christians, this attitude creates the desire for 'THE verse'. You know… the perfect summary in 10 words or less that gives us the answers we so desperately need to all of our current problems. When we approach scripture this way, we frequently impose our presuppositions on the text. We surgically remove a verse that 'speaks' to us, from the surrounding paragraph, letter, and book.”

All of us have probably been guilty of doing this at some point in our Christian life. We’ve played fast and loose with the biblical text…We’ve wanted a quick answer so we’ve imposed our meaning on the Biblical text. We need to be very careful how we interpret and apply the Bible……….

Hermeneutics (pt 2)

2006-07-27T05:22:00.000-07:00

II. The Good News

Hallelujah friends, God has spoken! The infinite God of the Universe has revealed Himself and His glorious character to finite man! This is really great news! We could not know GOD apart from him revealing himself to us. The primary way God speaks today is through His external Word. Thus it is our great privilege to figure out the spiritual significance of God’s Holy Word. To study the Bible to know its meaning. This of course can only be done through the Holy Spirit’s enablement, (see 1 Cor 1-2). Passages like 1 John 2:20 and 1 John 2:27 should provide every believer with hope. All of us can accurately understand the Word of God because of the H.S. The H.S. guides true believers into the Truth! This is very good news.

Of course, this truth does not eliminate the need for diligent study (1 Tim 2:15 makes that clear). This does not eliminate the need for gifted teachers either (Note 1 Cor 12:28 & Eph 4:11); But it does mean you (lay people) are not totally reliant on us. I hope this reminder is received as good news this evening! God has provided us a light onto our feet and a lamp until our path. We can know something of the mind of Christ and the will of God.

III. A Basic Definition

Before I move forward in this lecture let me 1st try and define this seminary word for you: “Hermeneutics” is simply a set of principles. It’s the science and art of interpreting the Bible. Bernard Ramm adds, “It is a science because it is guided by rules within a system; and it is an art because the application of the rules is by skill, and not by mechanical imitation.” More specifically sound hermeneutics “determine the rules which are legitimate in the interpretive process and those which are not.”

Another key concept that must be understood is the word exegesis: This means to lead the meaning out of the text, to show the way, or to interpret the proper meaning. IN other words, the human interpreter must avoid imposing a preconceived notion into any given text (Eisogesis). Our goal as we study the bible is to determine the original meaning of the text! We want to know what God meant when He, by the Holy Spirit, led the prophets and apostles to write the Holy Scriptures! (see Dr. Thomas' exegetical theology chart for more detailed info).

Starbucks Use and Church loyalty

2006-07-26T10:10:00.000-07:00

I admit that I'm not a Starbucks drinker but a Starbucks user. At any rate, this article pointed out an amazing stat that is nonetheless easy to believe. 80% of Starbucks revenue comes from folks who visit the store an average of 18 times a month. Now let me draw out a conclusion that has been forged in real experience and statistical proof. Not even the American evangelical church can claim such loyalty. It has already been pointed out that Southern Baptists (I picked them because they are the largest of this group and I use to be one) can not account for well over 8 million members of their churches (see here). Other mainline denominations are no better. In fact all the mainline groups (Presbyterian, United Methodists, Episcopalians, etc.) are hemorrhaging members at an astounding pace. So what does this mean?

Some church culture hawks will look at this and say, "That's it! If we start giving away espresso at our church services then people will come" (if you don't believe churches do this see here). Others with a more agnostic frame of mind might say, "See Christians are no better than anyone else, in fact they're less loyal." However, I think something else might explain why Starbucks can keep members and many churches cannot. The problem is not one of marketing. I lived in Los Angeles and can tell you that no church can compete with the world's marketing ability. Churches in my own area run TV commercials and news ads that come off looking silly at best and pandering at worst. To be sure, if your church gives away something that the average person likes then they might be lured for a season. However they will eventually figure out that if it’s coffee you want then Starbucks makes it better (which is the same reason you don’t go to McDonalds for the fish). There is an old business axiom that goes something like this: “what you win them with is what you will keep them with.” So what happens if you attract people to your church with promises like, “let us help get your finances in order” or “feeling depressed…come and let us help you”? Do they stay after they get their checkbook balanced or no longer “feel” depressed? Statistics show they clearly do not.

I think one of the lessons that shrinking church roles teaches us is that churches have been wooing folks with everything under the Sun except the gospel. When the warm fuzzies wear-off they are left holding a cold cup of coffee while listening to a “preacher” give a humanistic motivational speech. The world is very savvy at many things but one thing it is unable to do is be “the pillar and support of the truth” which is the sole role of the church (1 Tim. 3:14). So until some pupliteers wake-up to the reality that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation they will continue to miss the forest for the trees. Now this does not mean that true needs are overlooked in an effort to get someone to pray a prayer (I’m pretty sure that the latter is never mentioned in Scripture). There are extremes on both sides of this needy fence. One says give them a cup of cold water and don’t even dream of mentioning Jesus and the other says give them the coldest water they’ve ever had and make sure the cup has John 3:16 printed in bold on the outside. The first approach leaves Jesus out of the equation altogether and the other makes the cold water look better than having your sins washed away. The call of the gospel means telling others that they have no hope outside of faith in Jesus Christ and that it won’t necessarily make their life “better”. It also means that the church has a responsibility to help those who find it difficult to follow Jesus (i.e. discipleship). Lastly, it should be a reminder that many folks churches consider as “members” are not on the heavenly role that matters. . . they just came to your church for the coffee.

Leon Morris (1914-2006)

2006-07-26T06:47:00.000-07:00

Dr. Leon Morris has died in Melbourne Australia at the age of 92. Morris wrote many works of enormous help to Bible expositors everywhere. Most preachers have within their reach one of his numerous commentaries or theological works which will now remain as a testimony to Morris' theological heritage.

Hermeneutics (part 1)

2006-07-26T05:47:00.000-07:00

These notes come from a recent lecture i gave at my home church...

Applicational Hermeneutics

I. The Problem
We live in a day and age when people want to express there opinions at almost any cost.

(E.G.) Radio shows: Jim Rome, Sean Hannity, Howard Stern, etc.
TV Shows: Oprah Winifrey, Dr. Phil, Jerry Springer, etc.
Internet: Everybody and their grandma seems to have a blog these days.

Americans like to share their opinion in just about every venue imaginable…This attitude has inevitably permeated herself into the church. I think that this can be both a positive thing and a negative thing.

Dialogue teaching is one, of many different ways, the Bible can be taught during: small group settings, Sunday school classes, or even home bible studies. Dialogue & Interaction can be helpful for both the teacher (clarity) and the students (understanding/attention).

Expository exultation (ie. biblical preaching) should never be replaced by these popular teaching methods; But that doesn’t mean other forms of teaching don’t have a place in the life of the church…. (That’s exactly why our church offers a variety of teaching styles during our sunday school hour and FLOCK groups).

I don’t have time tonight to go into all the different ways Postmodern thought has affected the church…Suffice to say it has; in a variety of ways.

One of the more common errors is a very catchy but potentially unwise small group question: WHAT DOES THIS BIBLE PASSAGE MEAN TO YOU? (Have you heard this one before?) The emphasis is on the TO YOU part.

Some people believe a passage of Scripture can rightly mean multiple things to different people… Certain teachers would have you believe the Bible can be rightly explained with multiple, contradictory interpretations. So they ask: WHAT’S YOUR personal take on THIS VERSE? What does this passage mean to you? Some ask this question AS IF absolute truth was simply a by-product of modernity…As if truth were relative…Professor Roy Zuck wisely asks, “If the Bible can be made to mean anything we want, how can it be a reliable guide?”

When it comes to interpreting the Bible my fallible opinion and your personal impressions don’t matter too much. One Pastor put it this way, “the meaning of Scripture is the Scripture.” In other words, IF you don’t have the correct interpretation, you don’t have the Scriptures! You can not rightly apply a passage if you have the WRONG interpretation of the biblical text.

Friends, this is one of the reasons why sound hermeneutics are so essential! One of the most important disciplines for Christians to grow in, is learning how to apply sound hermeneutical principles to the biblical text. This is a crucial discipline for all of us to grow in.

This needs to happen regardless of the ministry context:
A) In our Children’s ministries…
B) Ladies Bible Study,
C) During Youth Group,
D) Adult Flocks,
E) Sunday School time,
F) at home during family devotions,
G) During biblical counseling sessions,
H) & obviously in the pulpit on Sunday mornings.

If you’d like one key verse that supports my thesis carefully, study 2 Timothy 2:15, “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth.”

Who Said It?

2006-07-18T20:37:00.000-07:00

The doctoral seminars are flying by after one week. Today we enjoyed presentations from each other on various expositors through church history. We heard about Hus, Lloyd-Jones, Boice, Criswell, Spurgeon, M’Cheyne, and Calvin. For me the highlight was fellow classmate, John Glass’s presentation on John Calvin. John Glass is a one of a kind. He is the only pastor who can say all of the following: 1) he believes in and practices expository preaching, 2) preaches in both French and English, 3) is an expert on Calvin, and 4) is the only expositor pastoring in Geneva, Switzerland today. Since we’re on the subject of Calvin, who said the following about the Reformer?

“Next to the study of the Scriptures which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my pupils to peruse Calvin’s Commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than Helmich himself (a Dutch divine, 1551–1608); for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly valued than all that is handed down to us by the library of the fathers; so that I acknowledge him to have possessed above most others, or rather above all other men, what may be called an eminent spirit of prophecy. His Institutes ought to be studied after the (Heidelberg) Catechism, as containing a fuller explanation, but with discrimination, like the writings of all men.”

Martin Luther: the preacher

2006-07-14T17:26:00.000-07:00

In today's D.min seminar, we spent all day talking about Martin Luther (the German Reformer)….his bumps, his bruises, his foibles, his strengths, his brilliance, and his pastoral excellence. Dr. Steve Lawson led our discussion into the heart of this Reformer’s ministry. As we are all pursuing doctorates it was fitting that we hear from Luther on the matter who said in his Table Talk, “Be assured that no one will make a doctor of the Holy Scripture save only the Holy Ghost from heaven.” Preachers need to drink deeply from the well of Martin Luther. No protestant preacher today can rightly know where his feet are planted without having Luther fixed somewhere upon his compass. Here are a few quotes to get the juices flowing;

“I simply taught, preached, wrote God’s Word; otherwise I did nothing. And then, while I slept…the Word so greatly weakened the papacy that never a prince or emperor did such damage to it. I did nothing. The Word did it all.”

“A good preacher invests everything in the Word.”

“When I was young, I read the Bible over and over and over again, and was so perfectly acquainted with it, that I could, in an instant, have pointed to any verse that might have been mentioned.”

NOTE: If one has not studied Luther, where should he begin? I would recommend to the novice that he get Stephen J. Nichols’s Martin Luther: A Guided Tour of His Life. Next I would recommend the classic biography of Luther by Roland Bainton called Here I Stand. After becoming familiar with his life and context, start reading his sermons and tracts. Luther believed his greatest work was Bondage of the Will and I believe history has proved him right so if you read nothing else…read Bondage.

Don't know much about history. . . of preaching?

2006-07-13T22:32:00.000-07:00

When I was a wee lad I loved to go on field trips during school. It was a great way to learn through hands-on experiences. Today we began our D.Min session by taking a book tour/field trip of Dr. Rick Holland’s study. The focus of our tour was books on the history of preaching (we also got to see Rick’s pics from his tour of reformation hot spots like Geneva and Wittenberg. Having Genevan pastor, John Glass, in our cohort to provide commentary on the pictures was only an added bonus. It was a riveting discussion and very helpful in bringing the vast expanse of this wonderful history together.

Preachers should know their history and this means they should know their craft which includes knowing from where they have come. Many writers have chronicled this history from various perspectives (e.g., E. C. Dargan, Hughes Old, John Kerr, A. E. Garvey, Pattison, F. R. Webber, and John Broadus among others). Jude tells us that preaching can be traced at least as far back as far as Enoch who was only seven generations removed from Adam. Then there was Noah, Moses, the prophets, Ezra and the scribes mentioned in Nehemiah chapter 8 and many others in the OT. There was John the Baptist, Jesus Himself, the Apostles and their associates. There were the church fathers, medieval preachers and then the Reformers. Since the Reformation, preaching has been on the incline but understanding how we got here has been on the decline. A. E. Garvie relates the importance of preaching history this way:

“The history of preaching…is the necessary presupposition of any discussion of the credentials, qualifications, and functions of the preacher today. Since he stands in a historical succession, he will recognize the responsibility of his trust, and the difficulty of his task, only as he has a distinct consciousness of this succession, and takes up into this ideal of his vocation all the elements of permanent significance and value in the previous history.”

What is "exposition"?

2006-07-12T20:26:00.000-07:00

What happens when a word reaches beyond any meaningful consensus and everyone makes a claim to its use? This is exactly the problem with the word “expository” as in “everyone claims to be an expository preacher.” It is no stretch to say that many preachers consider themselves expository preachers yet there is little agreement about what the word means. A survey of standard books on preaching will reveal that various authors all emphasize different perspectives (e.g., Robinson, D. A. Carson, Kaiser, Lloyd-Jones, Vines, Olford, Greidanus, Broadus, et al). This was a question we considered at some length in our first D.Min session today and one all preachers should carefully consider.

An examination of terminology raises difficult questions: Can there be biblical preaching that is not expository? Can there be exposition that is not preaching? Is exposition limited to a verse, a paragraph, or something else? Can topical preaching be expositional? The questions could be multiplied at this point. As a reference point I offer Richard Mayhue’s foundational definition from Rediscovering Expository Preaching.

Expository preaching is preaching that focuses predominantly on the text(s) under consideration along with its (their) context(s). Exposition normally concentrates on a single text of Scripture, but it is sometimes possible for a thematic/theological message or a historical/biographical discourse to be expository in nature. An exposition may treat any length of passage.

Following is a helpful summary of the essential elements of expository preaching:
1.The message finds its sole source in Scripture.
2.The message is extracted from Scripture through careful exegesis.
3.The message preparation correctly interprets Scripture in its normal sense and its context.
4.The message clearly explains the original God-intended meaning of Scripture.
5.The message applies the Scriptural meaning for today.

Students of Preaching

2006-07-11T09:51:00.000-07:00

Since the contributors to this blog are all preachers it is only fitting that we remain students of preaching and preachers. On that note, a couple of us are in Los Angeles for the next two weeks as we are in the D. Min of expository preaching program at The Master’s Seminary. I will be blogging some of the highlights from the lectures and interaction with my fellow cohorts.

USELESS TRIVIA WARNING (Turn back now): One of my favorite bits of actual LA “preaching trivia” is the fact that there is an actual street called “Exposition Boulevard.” Even better, it is the main street that goes through MacArthur Park in downtown LA.

Heroes of the Faith (pt 3)

2006-07-08T14:50:00.000-07:00

As I mentioned in my last post this discussion is all about (biblical) balance. It is possible to idolize gifted teachers in a way that would shame the Giver of all good gifts. We must be very careful not to worship our heroes. At the same time, it is entirely appropriate to “honor” faithful servants of the Lord. I will argue in this essay that it also fitting to “imitate” faithful Christian leaders.

We looked at 1 Corinthians 3:5-17 in my previous post. Don Carson summarized this section as follows:
“1. Christian leaders are only servants of Christ and are not to be accorded allegiance reserved for God alone.
2. God cares about his church, and he hold its leaders accountable for how they build it.”

The apostle Paul was not interested in dividing the Church. He gave his very life trying to unite the Church under the banner of Jesus Christ her Head. He did not want a bunch of Paul-groupies causing disunity in the Church. This is one of the reasons why he wrote 1 Corinthians 3:5-17. Yet in this same epistle the apostle Paul called the Corinthians to “imitate” him as he followed Christ (1 Cor 11:1). Paul understood that he was a leader. Pastors are examples and role-models whether they want to be or not. Their can be no Charles Barkley pastors in the ministry (“I’m not a role-model, parents should be role-models”). Paul actually encouraged his readers to imitate his life on numerous occasions (1 Cor 4:16; 1 Thess. 1:6). One pastor puts it this way, “Spiritual leaders must set an example of Christlikeness for all to follow.”

Hebrews 13:17 is pretty straightforward. In this passage of Scripture the author of Hebrews writes, “Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.” The Greek work for “imitate” is mimeomai from mimos. Here we are told "to mimic" the lives of our own church leaders (those who are worthy of imitation of course).

Of course in chapter 11 the author of Hebrews gave a number of illustrations of men and women who lived tremendous lives of faith. These godly heroes from the past should provide inspiration for all Christians (in the present). Hebrews 12:1-2 says, “Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance, and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

When I think of the Christian heroes I have (Spurgeon, Calvin, Whitefield, MacArthur, Begg, etc) I view them in these categories. Their faithfulness to God encourages me to live with the same type of consistency. Their commitment to the Word in the midst of great opposition is something I hope to imitate and mimic. Their love and passion for Christ is something that I desire as well.

Christian heroes (past and present) can help point us to Christ and motivate us all to live more faithful lives.

Weekend Fun: You provide the caption

2006-07-07T14:38:00.000-07:00

Christian Role Models and Factionalism? (pt 2)

2006-07-02T17:18:00.000-07:00

Is it really Idolatrous to have Christian Heroes? (pt 2)

Our God is the creator of the universe. He’s made every single person in the universe different and unique. In other words, none of us are exactly like another human being. This diversity surely is an expression of the creative genius of God. God is glorified in Man’s creative differences.

God has given all of us different talents, gifts, and abilities. When these “spiritual gifts” are used in the local church God is glorified and the body is edified. God has given believers a diversity of gifts for the unity of the body (1 Peter 4:10-11, 1 Cor 12-14). Of course, God has also given each of us different personalities, genetic make-ups, etc. so when two godly pastors preach on the same passage of Scripture it should not sound exactly the same (even when they apply the same hermeneutical principles with great exegetical skill).

It’s important to start here because some people try and imitate Christian leaders (from the past or present) and find themselves frustrated because they can’t duplicate them (at least not very well). Because of this reality some people say it is silly to try and imitate any Christian heroes (past or present). Others say trying “to imitate” or “model” another person shows an underlined attitude of discontentment (i.e. I wish I were made just like so and so). In my judgment this is a both/and deal NOT an either/or situation. Like in so many areas of life this is all about biblical balance.

The Apostle Paul warned the Corinthians against the dangers of factions (read 1 Cor 3). The early Corinthian church was apparently divided over a number of different issues. One of these dividing issues was Christian leadership. Some were saying, ‘I am of Apollos,’ while others declared, ‘Apollos is so ignorant of the Apostles writings, I am of Cephas;” while still others proclaimed, ‘You fools I was trained by our founding father, the great apostle Paul.”

D.A. Carson summarizes 1 Corinthians 3:5-17 very well. He writes, “Two truths can be simply set out:
1. Christian leaders are only servants of Christ and are not to be accorded allegiance reserved for God alone.
2. God cares about his church, and he hold its leaders accountable for how they build it.”

We can learn a lot from these two points. Every man, woman, and child is nothing apart from the grace of God (1 Corinthians 15:10). When God saves us we have the great privilege of being servants of the Master, fools for Christ, children of God. Martin Luther, John Wesley, and Sinclair Ferguson (to name just a few notable churchmen) are only “servants of Christ and are not accorded allegiance reserved for God alone.” We must be very careful not to worship our heroes (yes Calvinists are included in this discussion). One pastor puts it this way, ‘the best of men are still men at best.” Ultimately glory, praise, and honor is only due God (1 Tim 6:16).

Yet the Bible ALSO tells us to “honor” a variety of people and (God ordained) positions. Generally, we are told to give honor to whom honor is due (Romans 13:7). We are commanded to honor our father and mother (Matt 19:9); Honor widows who are truly widows (1 Tim 5:3); Honor elders who labor hard in the Word (1 Tim 5:17); Honor our human masters (1 Tim 6:1); Honor the king and all men (1 Pet 2:17); and honor our wives (1 Peter 3:7). It would be entirely appropriate then to “honor” and “esteem” faithful Christian ministers (see 1 Thess 5:12-13).

Carson goes on to say in his book The Cross and Christian Ministry, “It is not that gratitude to Paul or Apollos or some other worker is inappropriate. Rather what Paul finds inexcusable is the kind of fawning and defensive attachment to one particular leader that results in one-upmanship, quarreling, and jealousy. Implicitly, such allegiance is making too much of one person. It verges on assigning that person godlike status…No Christian leader is to be venerated or listed to or adulated with the kind of allegiance and devotion properly reserved for God alone.”

Much more could be said about this passage but I will save those thoughts for my next post.

Is it Idolatrous to have Christian Heroes?

2006-07-01T07:11:00.000-07:00

If you were to enter my pastoral office at work you would quickly notice two things. 1. The massive bookshelves that surround my office; and 2. The pictures of Christian preachers (past and present) that look over my shoulder (on my office walls). As a young minister I often look to the past to find Christian inspiration. I love reading about the legacies of the former “giants of the faith”. Godly men like George Whitefield, John Calvin, John Knox, and Charles Spurgeon (all of whom grace my walls) are heroes of mine (for a variety of reasons). These men were solely dedicated to the Word of God; men who gave their very lives for the gospel. Leaders who did not compromise even when it cost them dearly. Powerful Bible preachers and in many regards wonderful Christian role models. These men loved their Savior and lived for his approval. In my estimation they were Hebrews 11 type people.

There are also many modern day preachers who I greatly respect and admire. For this reason I have an autographed picture of my former pastor (John MacArthur), a small cut out picture of D Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and a postcard picture of Alistair Begg posted on my wall. I attended Grace Community Church for close to 13 years so obviously John MacArthur’s ministry is near and dear to my heart. He was my pastor for many years as well as the President of the two institutions I graduated from (TMC and TMS). Lloyd-Jones was a tremendous leader and a fantastic preacher, while Pastor Begg is a charismatic speaker who (in my opinion) really knows how to drive home the biblical application of a Text. I have great admiration and respect for all the pastor-preachers who grace my pastoral walls. In some ways they keep me accountable and humble. They encourage me to persevere and remain steadfast in my ministerial calling. They remind me that nothing matters more than God's gospel.

With that said, there is clearly a major “famine in the land” when it comes to great expository preaching that is both exegetical (i.e. deep), God-centered, Christ-exulting, and clear. Well-known preachers like John Piper, Mark Dever, R.C Sproul, John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Don Carson, and Alistair Begg are exceptions to this trend. {Of course there are many "lesser-known ministers" who faithfully serve God, (&)who are equally committed to this method/model of ministry/preaching (the contributors of this blog I hope are fair examples of this).}

The questions I want to ask and answer are ones that I hear quite frequently these days: Is it wrong to have a modern day (or ancient day) Christian heroes? Is it sinful to talk about having a favorite preacher (past or present)? Does all this “hero worship” inevitably lead to idolatry, human kingdom building, and/or divisive Christian factions? Are Piper-ites and MacArthur-ites and Begg-ites guilty of unbiblical factionalism (see 1 Corinthians 3)? Is it wrong that I have pictures of sinners saved by grace on my walls?

These are some of the questions I hope to tackle during my upcoming posts. Please be patient as it will take some time to develop and answer all these questions fairly.

Don't emerge just yet: a postscript

2006-06-30T17:25:00.000-07:00

Jerry, please indulge me but I think this needs to be heard and not buried in the comment section. I think the following insight is a wise and helpful reminder that "reaching out" through evangelism does not require a wholesale reappraisal to be effective. Thank you for your leadership and insight. He said:

"The "failures" in evangelism are glaring, yet, I think, misdiagnosed. The apparent ineffectiveness is almost always attributed to the lack of gospel fervor or soul-compassion. Emergents are quick to claim this because they equate their culture-friendly posture with true “outreach”. The very word “outreach”, however, demands not only taking the gospel “out” to the lost, but also offering what will actually “reach” them (Romans 1:16). Friendship along common pagan grounds will never reach anyone, and very often has the opposite result of corrupting the “evangelist”. Wayne Watson once wrote, “There’s a fine line between taking bed with a lost man, and being consumed by his way while reaching out in love…temptation’s right at your door…guard what you’re thinkin’ of, for it’s a fine line”."

"Furthermore, no honest Christian would deny that evangelicalism is diseased in this regard, but are such maladies the cause or merely symptoms of a more insidious degeneration? Where does the wholesale lack of gospel fervor come from? Do Christians suddenly lose their compassion for lost souls? I believe the root-problem is deeper. Whenever the transcendence and supernatural power of the gospel is traded for any one of a number of man-centered manipulations the cancer is effectively injected into the bloodstream. Gospel-fervor cannot feed on the impotent scraps of finiteness, nor is compassion for the souls of men poured out where there is no fear of judgment. The church’s true sickness is her endless crafting and idolatrous worship of “new and improved gospels”! The call for reform is desperately needed, but we must use the scalpel of scripture alone if we’re ever to return to true gospel passion. Radical change is needed, but not the surface innovations and rearranging suggested by those whose gospel is already vacuous. We need churches that, with contrite heart, “tremble at His word” and beseech the Lord of the harvest to send workers bearing His fruit!"

Don't emerge just yet: part two

2006-06-29T17:57:00.001-07:00

So why is the church so awash in a sea of culture-assessments and postmodern analyses to find out "what we're doing wrong"? One reason, I believe, is the rapid rise of evil in an historically conservative culture which always spawns a desperate counter-attack to preserve all that is treasured and familiar. In other words, the evangelical church has simply not been content with dwindling numbers, strained budgets, increased persecution, academic ridicule, and cultural marginalization. But this is precisely when the temptation to compromise is at its zenith. Instead of seeing such circumstances as "normal" (though not acceptable) in a declining culture of rebellion against God (millenniums of human history demonstrate this), we've made an idol out of "the impact we used to have", gone back to the drawing board of ministry, redefined the purpose of the church, and congratulated ourselves for our new crowds, pragmatically-gotten budgets, and fad-focused hype. Unfortunately, this new generation of ministry "architects" is too sufficiently disconnected from historical ecclesiology and theology to have any idea what they've crafted. They are truly a "generation who knows not Joseph". Who determined that we were doing something wrong? How was it determined? "The church is old-fashioned and out-dated" some will argue. OK, update your illustrations, modernize some of the churches great hymnology, write new songs, use technology, aggressively evangelize, let your presence be known, etc. I agree that these methodologies aren't really the issue. But if everything about the worship of God's people is "up for grabs" and dispensable simply because the culture seems more disinterested than ever, then the emerging church is not a "church" at all, but just another paradigm shift among pagans---a new way of "feeling" like they spiritually and morally matter in this life.

Another reason for this sprint toward “a new kind of church” is the disappearance of the universal necessity of the cross. When ministry becomes an attempt to subjectively “touch” the hearts of individuals rather than bring them face to face with their actual condition and ultimate need, the necessity of the cross is eliminated! Sin is no longer the result of natural corruption but the unfortunate outcome of limited knowledge, unfulfilled expectations, and overwhelming odds. Today’s average postmodern “reachable” is therefore not looking for a savior but a sympathizer who understands their plight from their vantage point. They don’t want a God whose friendship is conditioned upon obeying another master but a supplier who meets them at their desire. Professions of “faith” are merely pledges to join a less stringent religious group whose god demands nothing. Guilt from sin is more of an unfortunate inconvenience in an otherwise deserving, worthy, and loveable life. If a gospel is offered in these “churches”, it is often reduced to an acknowledgment that the historical Jesus “died for sinners”, while the new “convert” retains his/her sense of significant wholeness, allowing God to make him/her feel more deserving, worthy, and loveable. Trusting in the Holy Spirit to regenerate by means of His truth quickly becomes a forgotten essential. David Wells was poignant when he said, “The church [has adopted] strategies that…it is hoped, will make up for the apparent insufficiency of the word and ensure more success in the culture.” Furthermore, if human beings are not thoroughly corrupt and in dire straits with a holy God one wonders why God made such a big deal of Jesus’ death at all. Such a horrific bloodletting for the unavoidable mistakes of otherwise good people? Whatever for?

If today's "purpose-wars" tell us anything, it's that we must let God define the postmodern heart and the means to "reach them". I don’t believe today’s postmodernist truly values anything but themselves. Indeed, that’s what makes them postmodern, believing in no objective reality or meaning outside of the one they create. Reaching their ears with the saving gospel of Jesus Christ is our most awesome privilege and responsibility! But reaching their hearts with the gospel’s life-giving power is God’s sovereign joy. I long to see God move mightily in the hearts of sinners, but I shudder to think that some might find today’s “emerging authenticity” more attractive than truth. In fact, until they face the truth on God’s terms and stop haranguing about what they think the church ought to offer, they can never know saving grace. We should not be surprised that our culture is in a rapid declension away from truth, clarity, logic, and true meaning (2 Tim. 3-4). We must trust implicitly in the saving power of God to regenerate hearts---A work He has not ceased to do as He builds His hell-defying church. If we lose the battle here, we are no different than those who consider the preaching of the gospel as "foolishness".

Was Jesus an expository preacher?

2006-06-28T20:23:00.000-07:00

In his The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures: The Biblical Period, Hughes Oliphant Old makes the following points that Jesus was not only the model for preaching but was indeed an expository preacher. What do you think?

“If we are truly to understand Christian preaching, we must see Jesus Christ as its center. First we must see Jesus as the fulfillment of generations of preaching and teaching that went before him, and second we must see Jesus as the type, or perhaps prototype, of generations of preaching that have followed him. He is both the pattern of preaching and the gospel to be preached. We preachers make sense only when we are understood as continuing the ministry of our Master” (p. 8).

“…Jesus was himself an expository preacher, as the Gospels make clear at several points. To be sure, we get only a few brief glimpses of the preaching of Jesus in the Gospels, but those brief glimpses show him explaining the text of Scripture as the classic expositors have done before and after him” (p.10).

Don't emerge just yet: part one

2006-06-27T22:31:00.000-07:00

“To Impact the culture, we must change the way we do ministry”! We here it declared in every modern church growth book and mega-conference. The guru’s of this recent push are convinced that the present generation of young people have special needs and new values. They tell us that today’s youth are no longer reached by the aging evangelical approach of yesterday, but should be allowed to weigh in on what’s truly important for cultural impact. We are being told that our youth culture now highly esteems qualities like authenticity, credibility, and character more than the trappings of 'religion'. Is this true? Should we begin a thorough demolition of all that has gone before that we might raise up ministries of “authenticity”? I agree that such values may still be generally attractive to many, but no student of the postmodern culture (especially the youth pop-culture) could genuinely conclude that young people truly "value" or even understand character qualities such as authenticity or credibility.

What is "authenticity" anyway? Postmoderns differ greatly here, and many of them speak of it in terms that sound more like they value "non-judgmentalism" and "freedom of expression without scrutiny" (what they deem "the trappings of religion"). I've raised four children, all who've grown up in a postmodern, youth pop-culture kind of age. They've been in a pastor's home all their lives and had to forge a genuine faith of their own just like every true believer. Authenticity (i.e. true genuineness) is not at a premium in the student culture around them. What their unsaved peers value most (at least those who do the most complaining about today's church culture) is their own opinion and personal right to call it "truth" and have it validated. Anyone who disagrees is viewed as judgmental and unable to be "authentic". Furthermore, does today's average postmodern really value credibility? If so, why are their lives so rife with hypocrisy? If I claim to value credibility and find fault with a religion that seems out of touch and hypocritical, yet I make no attempt to model the quality I "value", am I not the greater hypocrite? If an unsaved postmodern attends our ministry looking for "credibility", becomes uncomfortable with our ministry “culture”, and concludes that we've missed it, have we "failed to reach them"? Should we adjust the worship of our God to become "credible" by their definition? Or could it be that what they mean by "credibility" is really a church's "willingness to adopt cultural norms and embrace other lifestyles indiscriminately”?

I find that when postmoderns speak about how the 21st century church ought to "emerge", they camp on two major themes: Their disillusionment over the hypocrisy of the evangelical church (sadly, a legitimate complaint), and the urgent need to jettison every vestige of Christian heritage in favor of what they deem "cutting edge" and therefore "relevant". Moreover, they tend to use the above as an excuse to justify their new ideas instead of offering sound biblical proof as to why the church ought to morph as they suggest. I speak with unsaved college students (who are curious and like to debate the issues) all the time, and what is clear from our interaction is that they value worldliness, autonomy, and the fewest scruples possible, all the while sensing the emptiness of these things. Whenever talk of biblical credibility and character arises they are suddenly in a dilemma. Their conscience bears them witness that the truth is being spoken, but a rebellious heart and sinful habits drown it out. Is this the time to ask them in what context or in what way they prefer to hear these things? A lost man doesn't even know how to make sense of all the converging desires within him, much less what he really needs. That's why the scriptures are so thorough on the convicting work of the Spirit. Before the Spirit's drawing, I had all kinds of religious notions but no clue as to real spiritual realities (holiness, sin, judgment, saving grace, the Church, etc.). No postmodern can ever "determine" what kind of church can "reach" his/her culture, and to believe they can is like asking a fish to describe its surroundings and expecting it to mention the water!

What was I thinking?

2006-06-27T08:05:00.000-07:00

Now that I have seriously lowered the level of discourse on this otherwise distinguished blog with what one called my "beer in the rear chicken" post, I will try to redeem this space with some more thoughtful entries. Nevertheless, I hope the point of said post was not lost on everyone.

Since all the contributors here are preachers, we find that our first love (gasp) is not blogging. Therefore we do not sit all day behind a computer screen surfing the blog wave hoping to catch a big one. Some of us (no all of us) are weighed down at the moment with funerals, weddings, counseling, doctoral work, mission trips, family life and weekly preaching duties. We love it and would not change it for a cushy IT job where blog opinions really matter. Whatever happens here is just the debris from our various ministries and we hope it helps a few others in the process.

On that note, I will pick up where I left off on "general revelation" in about another week. However, in the mean time, Jerry Wragg will be posting a series on the "emergent youth culture" which will probably bring a few lurkers out of hiding and knot-up a few turbans in the process. Have a great week!

Weekend Fun: Resolution #5 Chicken

2006-06-23T21:06:00.000-07:00

I love to grill out and this is one the coolest creations I have enjoyed. In light of recent events, I have renamed this recipe my "resolution #5 chicken".

Says who?

2006-06-22T09:07:00.000-07:00

Not a few bloggers have wondered (loudly at times) why The Together for the Gospel group would include a statement about manhood and womanhood in their now famous "Affirmations and Denials". Is it true that they are simply making the fence smaller so only a few select chosen ones may enter? I don't think this is the case at all. Those men who crafted the statement have clearly shown (also here) that the issue is over the authority of Scripture without which there is no objective basis for the gospel. I noticed an insight into this from Derek Thomas on another matter. I think what he is scratching at is relevant to the point the T4G guys are making. Thomas writes:

There is a direct hermeneutical line from the denial of Jesus' maleness as central to his incarnational imaging of his Father in heaven and the trend for egalitarianism. Both deny creational order as expressive of the divine image. As worldwide Anglicanism engages in public displays of extravagant death throes, Dr Rowan Williams will be working hard to keep the fragmenting body together. Will the American Church be invited to Lambeth in 2008? Can the Anglican communion define heresy and on what basis? Clearly, the basis is no longer the Scriptures. Withdrawal over "sexual preference" other than on the basis of divine revelation will inevitably be deemed bigotry and bad taste.

Watch your language!

2006-06-21T07:05:00.000-07:00

What do the following phrases have in common? Find out here and here.

Rainbow of Promise, our Ark of Salvation, and our Dove of Peace
Speaker, Word, and Breath
Overflowing Font, Living Water, Flowing River
Compassionate Mother, Beloved Child, and Life-giving Womb
Sun, Light, and Burning Ray
Giver, Gift, and Giving
Rock, Redeemer, Friend

"New Truth" is not God's Truth: Part Two

2006-06-20T09:21:00.000-07:00

One popular approach to the pursuit of “truth” and discovery is to examine the findings of man through what is often called “general revelation.” As we have pointed out here before, some believe that such an approach will triumph a new reformation whereby the church will become more enlightened and accepting of newer positions on issues such as homosexuality. While a rigorous debate over the biblical teaching of homosexuality has been raging for some time there is a more fundamental area that has been largely ignored. Many proponents of this new way have made the claim that discoveries being observed under the sphere of general revelation should be considered truth on par with the Truth of special revelation (i.e., the Scriptures of the OT & NT). This understanding has not been limited to more progressive views of the authority of Scripture but has been largely embraced by evangelicals on many fronts who would otherwise claim an assent to inerrancy.

We should not deny that general revelation exists. However, it is important that we understand the nature and limitations of this general revelation. There are many today who are asking the question that Pilate asked before Jesus, “What is truth?” (John 18:38). Sadly, just like Pilate, many of those who are asking the question have not waited for the answer. Worse still, they have sought answers to their questions from broken cisterns which carry only muddy water at best. The remainder of this post will focus on the audience of general revelation while subsequent posts will examine the content of this information and mankind’s response to it.

General revelation is called such because it consists of information that is universally made known to all people in all places at all times. There is no limit to the audience of general revelation because such knowledge is constant (cf. Psalm 19:2) and such knowledge is persistent in its reach to the ends of the earth (cf. Psalm 19:4). This means that there are no specialists who observe things that others do not (i.e., there are no secret or special insights required to see it). Not only is this true because of what is seen under the heavens in creation but because of how mankind is created. The Apostle Paul tells us that general revelation is self-evident within every human being (Rom. 1:19). Man and woman are created in the image of God and therefore bear in some way a conscious imprint of the Triune God that is inescapable (yes, even for the God-denying pagan).

So general revelation is exactly what its name entails, it is “general” information indiscriminately revealed to all creation without bias and without limitation in regards to its audience. For some to maintain that they have special insight or perspective that they have gleaned from general revelation has less in common with the Biblical teaching and more in common with ancient forms of Gnosticism. Furthermore, any “discoveries” made by man must be held up to the light of God’s special revelation and not seen for their supposed uniqueness but for their confirmation that sin and struggle are all common to man (cf. 1 Cor. 10:13). Robert Thomas helps us to summarize this distinction with these concluding thoughts:

“….information and discoveries originating in secular fields do not belong in the category of God’s revealed truth. They therefore have no basis for a ranking alongside God’s special revelation. They may appear to be beneficial to one or another generation and thereby earn at least temporarily the designation of truth, but they must always be tentative because they lack the certitude and authority of God’s revealed truth. They are not on a plane with the body of truth in the Bible and are therefore unworthy of being integrated with it” (Robert Thomas, “General Revelation and Biblical Hermeneutics,” The Master’s Seminary Journal, Volume 9, 1:14-15).

"New Truth" is not God's Truth: Part One

2006-06-15T11:50:00.000-07:00

As we reported here yesterday, there is a debate that is raging within some denominational circles about homosexuality. The basis of the argument has degenerated to the axiom that "all truth is God's Truth" therefore newer and more enlightened discoveries should have precedence over older and more “outdated” forms of understanding (e.g. the Bible).

The argument goes something like this (which can be seen in Bishop Griswold’s quote from the previous post): Since we are more enlightened being armed with more education and research concerning the inner workings of man’s psyche and physical well-being then we should eschew old ideas of biblical anthropology in exchange for a more biological understanding. The result being that God made a person such and such a way therefore any attempts to change such is a lack of love and an affront to the imago dei. Even N.T. Wright has reasoned that a decision concerning sexuality in the church should be left up to a “consensus”.

This argument while largely taking place outside of evangelical circles nevertheless reveals a fundamental weakness in many evangelicals’ notions of truth and the sufficiency of Scripture. I know many evangelical who look at passages like Psalm 19 and walk away thinking that God has revealed Himself in creation in such a way that general revelation provides us with something that the Bible does not. If you find it hard to believe that evangelicals would embrace such a perspective then I would invite you to visit the “counseling” department of most evangelical seminaries. When you’re done there visit the biology lectures of evangelical colleges. After you’ve listened to their lectures, visit the psychology, sociology, anthropology or physical science departments. Better yet let some of the leading evangelical scholars in this area speak for themselves:

“All truth is certainly God’s truth. The doctrine of general revelation provides warrant for going beyond the propositional revelation of Scripture into the secular world of scientific study expecting to find true and useable concepts” (Crabb, Effective Biblical Counseling, 36).

“The evangelical church has a great opportunity to combine the special revelation of God's Word with the general revelation studied by the psychological sciences and professions. The end result of this integration can be a broader (and deeper) view of human life” (Narramore, “Perspectives on Integration,” 17).

“My knowledge of special revelation—the Bible—would have been combined with my knowledge of general revelation—what God has taught me about his world through my study of psychology, physiology, counseling, rehabilitation, and other fields” (Collins, “An Integration View,” 117).

“Just as the rain falls on the just and the unjust, so too does truth, by the process that theologians call God’s common grace. Romans 1 speaks of God even revealing central truths about his nature to unbelievers (v. 19). … If we understand God’s counsel to be truth, we will be committed to pursuing truth wherever we find it. And we sometimes find it in the careful and insightful writings of unbelievers” (Jones and Butman, Modern Psychotherapies, 27-28).

"New Truth" needed says Bishop

2006-06-14T12:44:00.000-07:00

The top official leading the Episcopal Church in the United States is retiring. Bishop Frank T. Griswold reflected on the controversy surrounding the denomination and its stance on homosexuality with these words: "In the Gospels, Jesus says, 'I have many more things to say to you but you cannot bear them now,' which suggests to me that God's truth is always unfolding," he said. "If we can accept that there are new truths that science brings us, or new discoveries in medicine, why is it when it comes to sexuality, there is no new truth?"

His premise seems to be the old adage “all truth is God's Truth.” Have medicine and modern discoveries really brought us “new truth”? If so, does this extend to sexuality also, as the Bishop has suggested? What are the implications of this for ministry, preaching and the cooperative efforts of those who believe mainline denominations which embrace such ideas can still be turned around? Let us know what you think?

A Sermon Charge to High School Graduates (PT 2)

2006-06-12T06:14:00.000-07:00

III. Third, you are a college student:

Ecclesiastes tells young people to “REJOICE in the days of their youth” (Eccl 11:9-10).
Yes it is spiritual to: Love life! To have a ton of fun! To truly enjoy the prime of life. You’ll only be a college student once, so live it up!!

Just remember the Biblical balance; Ephesians 5:16 commands us to, “Make the most of our time since the days are evil” Ecclesiastes 11:9 goes on to say, “Rejoice, young man, during your childhood, and let your heart be pleasant during the days of young adulthood. And follow the impulses of your heart and the desires of your eyes. Yet know that God will bring you to judgment for all these things.” “Whatever you do, do all to His glory (1 Cor 10:31).” See your HW and your studies as a stewardship matter...Just don’t let your books get in the way of your fun too much! 

IV. Fourth, soon you will be a dormmate and a roommate:
One of the most refining aspects of college often takes place in the dorm room:

A) Here you will be tested, tried, and perhaps even tempted.

B) Here you will learn what it truly means to DIE to self.

Jesus said if anyone wishes to come after me, let him first DENY HIMSELF….(Luke 9:23)
Find ways to serve your roommate. Love her unconditionally.
Learn how you can become more like Jesus by embracing this relationship whole-heartedly
Even when you have the best roommate in the world their will be times when you feel like murdering someone…. My advice to you is simple: Resist that temptation!
 Embrace your difficult circumstances knowing they’re from the Lord (James 1:2-6).

C) In the dorms you will learn how you can humbly implement the principles found in Philippians 2:3-4, “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.”

D) Here you will learn how to resolve conflict Biblically-

Try to practice the “4 biblical rules of communication” from Ephesians 4.
1. Be honest!
2. Keep current!
3. Act, don’t react!
4. Attack the problem, NOT the person!
View your roommate & your dormmates as God’s sovereign agents, sent by Him to help you grow!

E) In your dorm room you will learn how to repent and how to forgive (Matt 5:23-24)

And Finally (F) In the dorms you will discover how diverse the body of Christ truly is. God has sovereignly saved: Jocks, nerds, merit scholars, home-schoolers, international students, americans, misfits, and more… God’s glory is surely displayed in this diversity (Rev 5:9). Seek out Christian friends who are red hot for Jesus- Even if they are (humanly speaking) radically different than you!

The sooner, we the church, learn to embrace God’s creative diversity the sooner we’ll be able to function as one (Eph 4:16)

(Graduate) Please know your church family will be praying for you. We are here for you if you ever need us. We are only a phone call away….

But let me close by reminding you of my favorite Bible verse in all of Scripture (Joshua 1:9). May you cling to this verse whenever you feel lonely, homesick, confused, or scared. I have seen God keep this promise in my own life as I’ve moved from WI to CA; CA to WA; WA to CA; CA to FL; FL to CA; and CA to IN.

God said to Joshua before he possessed the land of Canaan;
“Have I not commanded you be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified, do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you may go.”

If God be for you- who or what can stand against you (Romans 8:28-39)?!?

A Sermon Charge to High School Graduates (PT 1)

2006-06-09T09:20:00.000-07:00

I am giving a brief sermon charge to our High School graduates this Sunday. Actually, this year we will only be honoring one student (last year it was four).

We are gathered here tonight to praise God for the infinite grace that has been displayed in your life!

We want to congratulate you on all your accomplishments; We want to thank you for your faithfulness to this Church and to our youth group in particular; & tonight as your teen pastor, I’d like to briefly encourage you from Holy Scripture as you prepare to leave home and begin an exciting journey at Grace College.

I think the best way I can accomplish this goal is by looking at the various roles you have (or will soon have) and discover what God’s Word has to say about each of these important responsibilities:

This is my personal charge to you that I trust will reflect God’s priorities (not merely my opinions)….

I. First and foremost you are a child of God:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith and that not of yourself lest anyone should boast.” (Eph 2:8) God graciously saved you and I know you’ve dedicated your life to His service!  You are a Christian, a disciple of Christ’s.

It has been a privilege to see you “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” You’ve been blessed with a remarkable memory and a sharp mind. Your passion for reading books and learning is exemplary; Your creative use of your imagination is a wonderful endowment…

-->Continue to use these gifts for God’s glory! (1 Peter 4:10ff)

With that said:
1) Never allow yourself to think you’ve somehow arrived.

Philippians 3:12 says, “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.” Keep on pressing on!

2) Avoid comparing your spiritual walk with others; Rather focus your attention on the Author and the Perfecter of your faith.

Christ-likeness is the standard and our objective (1 Peter 1:14-16). Also remember the inspired words of Paul in 1 Thess 4:10, “But we urge you, brethren, to excel still more…”
“Excel still more” in your faith

From my own personal experience, I know that Christian college students are especially vulnerable to spiritual pride… After all the Apostle Paul said, “that knowledge (alone) puffeth up.”

3) Continue then to grow in humility, gentleness, and grace as you no doubt will grow in knowledge, understanding, and theological wit… (See C.J. Mahaney’s book Humility: True Greatness)

4) I encourage you to seek wise counsel from godly dorm friends, your RD, and your parents; BUT ONLY after you’ve 1st asked God for wisdom and direction.
Proverbs 3:5-6 remind us to, Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And do not lean on your own understanding. 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight.

If, and when problems arise in your life, make sure that first you take everything to the Lord.

It’s a great blessing being able to attend a solid Christian college. I encourage you to take full advantage of this wonderful opportunity. Learn all you can from your new Christian friends, your Christian professors, and your RAs.

5) Constantly remind yourself though that with great privilege, comes great stewardship.
Jesus said to “whom much is given, much is required” (Luke 12:48)

6) As a child of God don’t forget how important daily bible devotions are to your spiritual growth.

It’s easy to dry up even when you’re in the right place-

Don’t neglect the Bible! For it was the Word of God that made you wise unto salvation and it is the sacred Scriptures that will sanctify your very soul (2 Timothy 3:15-17).

1 Peter 2:2 says, “like new born infants LONG for the pure milk of the Word that by It, you may grow in respect to your salvation.”

Pray that your love for Jesus Christ will deepen as a result of these times!!

7) One last thing: Don’t let anyone tell you that Bible classes, chapel, dorm devotions, and parachurch ministries can usurp the central role of the local Church!

The Scriptures are clear that Christ’s bride has a unique place in God’s Kingdom program. The local church is the visible representation of the body of Christ! Make it a priority to plug yourself into a biblical church! One where you can be feed, discipled, and cared for; One where you can use your spiritual gifts & talents for the edification of the local church and the glory of God!

If you do these things I truly believe you will grow into the Proverbs 31 women that all of us desire you to become!

 Never forget, you are first and foremost a child of God! 

II. Second, you still are your parent’s daughter:

Like most Christian college students I’m guessing you are still very much financially dependent on your parents?!? 

That of course means that you’re still obligated to obey and honor them as Ephesians 6:1-3 says; Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 Honor your father and mother (which is the first commandment with a promise), that it may be well with you, and that you may live long on the earth.

 When you’re up at night eating ice-cream, painting toe nails, or maybe just cramming for a chemistry quiz take a moment to stop and thank God for giving you Christian parents. Try and find a free moment every week (or so) to call your mom. Take a minute or two to send your dad a post-card reminding him how much you love and miss him; & if you have any free time don’t forget to send an email to your lonely siblings, esp. your older brother! 

What are you currently reading?

2006-06-01T14:02:00.000-07:00

It's ministry share time: What are you currently reading? How have you enjoyed these books? What are you learning? How have these books impacted your preaching? etc...

Books I am currently reading:

1. No Place for Truth (by David F. Wells).
2. The Cross and Christian Ministry (by D.A. Carson).
3. Women's Ministry in the Local Church (by Ligon Duncan)
4. Knowing God (By J.I. Packer)
5. The Holiness of God (by R.C. Sproul)
6. Growing Up Christian (by Karl Graustein)

Recently I noticed my relationship with God was growing dull and that my love for Christ (at times) was pretty luke-warm thus the need for a heavy dose of Theology Proper. My study through Knowing God has been VERY refreshing. Theology Proper is so crucial to maintaining a healthy relationship with the Father. It has been said of John Calvin that no man had a more profound understanding of God than he. It is no wonder why his preaching was so powerful and why his theological insights are so profound. He had an intimate relationship with his Creator. If God is not BIG in the pulpit then we have ample reasons to mourn. If God is not awesome in the pulpit than we shouldn't be surprised when we hear that our people are timid, depressed, anxious, and/or proud.

The Holiness of God (my first time reading it) has been really convicting. Sadly, I bring God way down, way too often (when people are big and God is small syndrome). Thankfully He is not like me in SOO many ways. The Holiness of God has helped remind me of this reality. First and foremost we need to KNOW our God.

No Place for Truth has been a long but very good read. If you love history and evangelical theology than this book is a must read. It's been very insightful as i seek to better understand the modern culture as well as the Church.

My reading through Women's Ministry in the Local Church has been ok. In my judgment it is way too "Covenantal" (in really too many unnecessary places)... Their are some really great thoughts scattered throughout the book but all in all it has not been one of my favorite books on the subject.

The Cross and Christian Ministry has been a good challange to me in many ways. Our ministries must be cross-focused.
Honestly i have not made my way very far in this book so more to come on this book...

Prayer of Confession

2006-05-26T15:21:00.000-07:00

Father, we have sinned. We confess that we do not listen to your Word. We read it and hear it, but we do not obey it. We say, “That was a great sermon!” but it doesn’t make a difference, because we are not willing to change.

We confess that we do not worship you the way you deserve to be worshiped. We are more concerned about what we get out of it than what we put it into it. We are often distracted. Our lips keep moving, but our hearts are cold and still.

We confess that we do not love one another very much. We do not want to be bothered with other people’s problems. We think the worst about others, rather than the best.

We confess that we do not always fulfill our responsibilities to one another. We are harsh when we should be gentle, and when we need to be firm, we lack the courage to say or do what is right.

We confess that we are not willing to pay the high cost of discipleship. We try to be as worldly as we think we can get away with. We prefer to squeeze our faith in around the edges of life, rather than to let you stand at the center to control everything we are and have.

We confess that we lack passion for evangelism. We think of missions as something someone else does, somewhere else, rather than something you have called us to do right here and now. We lack the courage to proclaim the gospel. We are afraid to talk about spiritual things, for fear of what others will think.

We confess that we lack compassion. We think it is important to help the poor, provided that someone else actually does the helping.

In the name of Jesus, we ask forgiveness for these and all our sins.

HT: Phil Ryken

I want to be a Reformed Pastor

2006-05-25T08:54:00.000-07:00

Being a Reformed Pastor is not the same as being a "reformed pastor". The latter is a particular understanding of the doctrines of the grace of God as taught in Scripture and recovered in the period known as the Reformation. These doctrines are then articulated and expounded in such a way that one sees the glory of God in salvation being magnified by the message of Scripture. All the contributors to this blog affirm and believe the biblical teaching of God's sovereignty in salvation and that man's chief end is to revel in the glory of His supreme majesty in every expression of life and ministry. However, a strong qualification must be given at this point: reformed theology is not what Richard Baxter had in mind when he titled his work The Reformed Pastor.

J. I. Packer notes this well in his introduction to the Banner of Truth edition, “By 'reformed' he means, not Calvinistic in doctrine, but renewed in practice.” Baxter writes, “If God would but reform the ministry and set them on their duties zealously and faithfully, the people would certainly be reformed. All churches either rise or fall as the ministry doth rise or fall (not in riches or worldly grandeur) but in knowledge, zeal and ability for their work.” Therefore, even the Methodist leader Francis Asbury could write in his diary (August 19, 1810), “O what a prize: Baxter's Reformed Pastor fell into my hands this morning.” Baxter's chief concern was the reformation of the Christian ministry.

The pastors of our day greatly need to take up The Reformed Pastor and devour its message. After we have read it, we need to cry out to the Lord and repent of our laziness, our poorly thought out sermons, our disregard for the wellbeing of the flock and our desire for more numbers in the pews when we have not been faithful to the numbers we presently have. After we repent we need to shepherd the flock in such a way that the genuine character of our ministry and our deep love for the people of God is readily seen. The pastor who sees his sole task as to preach isolated sermons and not shepherd the lives of his people is a fool and has made a giant leap over such texts as Ephesian 4:11-12 and 1 Peter 5. Furthermore he may be called a preacher but please don't call him a “pastor.” He may travel the circuit as a fine teacher of Scriptural truths even garnishing the title of “expositor” but please don't call him a shepherd if he has neglected his calling.

When I graduated from seminary, my father-in-law painted a marvelous watercolor of Baxter's church at Kidderminster. That painting has hung outside the doorway to my study since I began ministering to the wonderful flock I serve at Grace Church. Everyday when I walk into my study to prepare for Sunday's sermon, I am reminded that there once was a man who was deeply flawed like me yet left a legacy of pastoral faithfulness. He reminds me that being a minister of the gospel is more than crafting sermons with exegetical precision and delivering them with homiletical excellence. Like Baxter following the example of the Apostle, I need to walk beside my flock so that I can admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak and be patient with all (cf. 1 Thess. 5:14). May the Lord who called us to this ministry stir our hearts by the faithful testimony left us in Mr. Baxter's The Reformed Pastor.

from The Reformed Pastor

2006-05-24T11:51:00.000-07:00

Philip Doddridge said, The Reformed Pastor "should be read by every young minister, before he takes a people under his stated care." Here are a few choice quotes from The Reformed Pastor.

“Nothing can be rightly known, if God be not known; nor is any study well managed, nor to any great purpose, if God is not studied.”

“Theology must lay the foundation, and lead the way of all our studies.”

“...when languages and philosophy have almost all their time and diligence, and instead of reading philosophy like divines, they read divinity like philosophers, as if it were a thing of no more moment than a lesson of music, or arithmetic, and not the doctrine of everlasting life; this is that blasteth so many in the bud, and pestereth the Church with unsanctified teachers!”

“They will likely feel when you have been much with God: that which is most on your hearts, is like to be most in their ears.”

“Vanity and error will slyly insinuate, and seldom come without fair pretenses: great distempers and apostasies have usually small beginnings.”

“Take heed to yourselves, lest your example contradict your doctrine.”

“It is a palpable error of some ministers, who make such a disproportion between their preaching and their living; who study hard to preach exactly, and study little or not at all to live exactly.”

“If you intend the end of the ministry in the pulpit only, it would seem you take yourselves for ministers no longer than you are there.”

“...What skill is necessary to make the truth plain; to convince the hearers, to let irresistible light in their consciences, and to keep it there, and drive all home; to screw the truth into their minds, and work Christ into their affections...”

“Oh, therefore, brethren, lose no time! Study, and pray, and confer, and practice; for in these four ways your abilities must be increased. Take heed to yourselves, lest you are weak through your own negligence, and lest you mar the work of God by your weakness.”

The Reformed Pastor...Today

2006-05-22T04:20:00.000-07:00

“I have made, next to the Bible, Baxter's Reformed Pastor my rule as regards the object of my ministry. It were well if that volume were often read by all our pastors.”

Those were the dying words of John Angell James. J. I. Packer tells us that James would read Baxter on Saturday evenings, to prepare himself for Sunday. Long before there was a man named N. T. Wright, the then Bishop of Durham (1925), H. Hensley Henson, said, “The Reformed Pastor is the best manual of the clergyman's duty in the language, because it leaves on the reader's mind an ineffaceable impression of the sublimity and awfulness of spiritual ministry.” Packer reminds us that Spurgeon “used frequently to have his wife read it to him on Sunday evenings, when the day's preaching was done.” Such is the nature of a work that has endured many editions and reprints since it was first published in 1656 for a minister's meeting in Worcestershire. The theme of this week will be Richard Baxter's monumental pastoral treatise The Reformed Pastor. Our contributors will discuss this book's overall value to their respective ministries and the impact that this work has had in the shaping and refining of their pastoral labors (readers are encouraged to discuss this theme in the comments section). It was Packer who raised the able question we should all consider, “Has Baxter's book a ministry to ministers today?”

Going Where Few Preachers Want to Go

2006-05-19T20:35:00.000-07:00

I recently talked to a friend who was visiting new churches after relocating. After visiting one particular church he went up and visited with the pastor who asked him, “What did you think of my sermon?” As I preacher I shudder to think of asking that question to a first time visitor. Why is that? Am I afraid of an honest critique? Is it because my pride is so deeply seated that I cannot bear the thought of a needed “objective” opinion? The answer is, “yes!” But it should not be so. If I am unclear or lame in my preaching I need to hear that, often!

All of these thoughts came to a head this past Sunday afternoon as I sat in our church listening to a number of men teaching in our version of a homiletics lab. In case you’re curious we adapted the material from this which I would highly recommend.

While these men taught I found myself critiquing their preaching as well as my own. That was unexpected! Listening to these men [who by the way did an excellent job] I was struck by an area in my own preaching that is weak and I think it might be helpful issue to address for other young, aspiring preachers like myself.

I found myself furiously writing notes about the sermon when I realized that there were many excellent points they were making that I simply could not write down or digest in the time that they were presenting them. Things like word definitions, poignant quotes, or deep insights were often lost on me because I was caught somewhere between writing/thinking/digesting and applying. In the end I had cryptic notes, confused definitions and half recorded quotes. I looked at my notes when they were done and asked myself, “What do I do with this?” No preacher wants his people to walk away with those thoughts, at least I hope not.

But here’s the interesting thing, these guys were not preaching fast or giving the information rapidly [did I mention that they did an excellent job]. They were speaking in a normal pace and providing the information fluidly. But then it dawned on me. Even a regular pace is often too fast for a person who is not thoroughly familiar with the material you are preaching.

I was struck with the reality that my key quotes and definitions are probably lost on the audience because I know them so well after 20-30 hours of sermon prep that I just assume that they can keep pace. I do not think that is accurate anymore. So in this moment of critiquing another brother’s preaching, my own short comings came into brilliant focus. I need to remember that the people who are listening to me do not have the benefit of hours of study that I have. They are hearing it for the first time and I need to be more careful here. I need to slow down on the points that are critical in the sermon and give people a chance to absorb.

So how can we [you] improve in being better conveyors of information? I have no absolute answers here, just some thoughts that might help.

1. Repeat KEY concepts regularly. As some have said, tell them what you are going to tell them, tell them and then tell them what you told them.
2. Define words with precise terms – the fewer the better so that they get THE meaning, not all possible meanings.
3. Repeat the definitions slowly.
4. Read quotes slowly and repeat them if they need to be written for reflection.
5. If you use PowerPoint, put compelling quotes or definitions on the screen so that they can go back and write down what they missed.
6. Make clear in your preaching the point they must grasp. Use expressions like, “Here’s the point I want you to get.”
7. Tell them where they need to sit up and listen if you desire them to absorb, not record. Rick Holland is excellent at this.
8. Summarize large points into a few cogent, clear-cut words or phrases that make the point. John MacArthur is a master of the synonym and this concept. He’ll repeat an idea with so many “like” words that every person is able to grasp the idea he is making with a word association.
9. Confide these things in a good friend who will give you feedback regularly.

I hope you’ll take encouragement from these words about my shortcomings and maybe it will help some as it has helped me.

Pretend I am that guy visiting your church for the first time and you just asked me, “What did you think of my sermon?”

For His Glory!

So you wanna talk about culture?

2006-05-18T14:30:00.000-07:00

I am finding some of the discussions about culture around the blog world to be out of step with the clear imagery that Jesus uses in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:27-30). Some have become so drunk (both literally and metaphorically) with "understanding culture" that they have become unbalanced in their pursuit of holiness. While I affirm the need to understand your surroundings (like duh) this should not mean that we drink from the same putrid well that Bunyan's Mr. Worldly WiseMan devoured. On the one hand it is a grievous error to confuse mutilation for sin with mortification from sin but it is equally erroneous to eat mud pies so you can relate to two year olds.

Stott keenly notes, “It is better to forgo some experiences this life offers in order to enter the life which is life indeed; it is better to accept some cultural amputation in this world than risk final destruction in the next. Of course this teaching runs clean counter to modern standards of permissiveness. It is based on the principle that eternity is more important than time and purity than culture, and that any sacrifice is worth while in this life if it is necessary to ensure our entry into the next. We have to decide, quite simply, whether to live for this world or the next, whether to follow the crowd or Jesus Christ” (John Stott commenting on Matthew 5:27-30 in The Message of the Sermon on the Mount, 91).

Together for the Gospel (PT 3)

2006-05-11T10:52:00.000-07:00

The Together for the Gospel conference was a great experience. Seven of Evangelicalisms brightest lights gathered together to encourage, admonish, motivate, and convict thousands of church leaders (and some future church leaders). Whenever you bring together Mark Dever, Al Mohler, C.J, Maheny, Ligon Duncan, John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, and John Piper it’s an occasion to rejoice in.

Pastor Mark Dever talked about “the pastor’s understanding of his role.” He did a quick exposition through 1 Corinthians 4 showing the “Three Marks of a Real-Minister.” Those marks were a cross-centered message (vv. 1-7), a cross-centered life (vv. 8-15), and a cross-centered follower (vv. 16-21). Mark reminded us that the cross is the center, but praise God it is not the end!

Ligon Duncan lectured on the importance of preaching from the Old Testament. He gave 8 major points during his lecture: 1. Please do not neglect the O.T. 2. Preach the O.T. expositionally. 3. Preach Christ from the O.T. 4. Preach one plan of Redemptive history from the O.T. 5. Preach grace from the O.T. 6. Preach the character of God from the O.T. 7. Preach experientially from the O.T. 8. Preach the Christian life from the O.T.

Dr. Al Mohler lectured on “preaching with the culture in view.” This was a very well balanced lecture, one that every Christian minister should listen to. Mohler pointed out 2 extremes we need to avoid: 1. Simply ignoring the culture altogether (e.g. Amish paradise). 2. Allowing culture to dominate our ministries (e.g. the Emergent church movement). Dr. Mohler reminded us that you can not withdraw entirely from culture even when you try. Culture allows human beings to relate to one another (so don’t view it as an entirely negative concept).

Like many other areas in the Christian walk this is all about balance friends; “Culture can’t be our main concern, but it can’t be avoided either.” Mohler suggested we read Augustine’s “City of God.” We must realize that people are part of culture. Therefore, “we can not withdraw from the people because THEY are the object of God’s love.”

Mohler ended his lecture explaining why culture (right now) presents some serious problems from the Christian preacher. Understanding these matters helps the preacher to be precise and more relevant (biblically speaking). Ultimately we have to respond according to whatever culture God places us in. We live in perilous times but we have the Holy Scriptures to protect and guide us on our way. The gospel is a transcultural message and it is essential for every person to embrace it in faith.

Together for the Gospel (PT 2)

2006-05-05T15:46:00.000-07:00

The Together for the Gospel conference was a first time event that celebrated both the unity and the diversity of Christ’s church. 2800 church leaders united under the banner of one thing: the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ. The diversity of this event was evident when listening to the panel discussions that took place throughout the main plenary sessions (5 panel sessions took place over 2 short days). Mark Dever (a Reformed S. Baptist), Al Mohler (a Southern Baptist), C.J. Mahaney (a Reformed Charismatic), and Ligon Duncan (a Presbyterian) were the principle leaders behind this gathering. They modeled for us how we as Evangelical gospel ministers can disagree on secondary matters yet come together and contend for what matters most (Jude 3). This conference was all about Biblical unity and Christ-exalting diversity.

C.J. Mahaney (in my mind) was clearly the most uneducated person among the “mighty men” (which included MacArthur, Sproul, and Piper); yet his sermon on 1 Timothy 4:16 had the greatest impact on my own soul. As D.A. Carson recently wrote, “The message of the cross proves that God’s folly has outsmarted human wisdom; His weakness has overpowered human strength.” The cross has saved many nobodies (1 Cor. 1:26-31), praise God for this! After a typical (strange) Mahaney intro, C.J. jumped into 1 Timothy 4:16, here he provided a number of excellent insights into the application of “watch your life.” C.J. said that it’s easier to study doctrine then to examine our heart, our motives, our attitudes, etc. Many pastors spend countless hours reading theology books, browsing theological blogs, and preparing biblical sermons. God calls us to watch our doctrine but not in isolation.

Mahaney reminded us that we cannot watch ourselves by ourselves. In other words, we need Christian accountability. He challenged Sr. Pastors to not set themselves above their fellow pastors and elders like Popes or Kings. Too many Sr. Pastors use their position as a shield to ward off any rebuke or criticism. Lay people or even fellow elders following Galatians 6 are accused of being unsupportive or worse yet insubordinate (by some "Sr." Pastors). This type of attitude is deadly to the soul.

I’m thankful an elder at my church recently confronted me over something I did in an unbiblical manner. He gently corrected me and then he held me accountable to do what was right. In my estimation he showed great courage (though I realize I’m only an Ast. Pastor). :)

Nonetheless, all of us would do well to meditate on 1 Timothy 4:16: Practically how are you applying the first part of verse 16? Do you even have a strategy? We don’t grow in doctrine by watching TV, surfing the internet, or by playing an excessive amount of golf. Similarly, we can not really watch our lives (our hearts), simply by reading exegetical commentaries and other good Christian books. We have to be deliberate in this battle for our own souls before we will ever rescue the souls of others.

We need to encourage others to wound our egos. We need to ask people to lovingly identify sins in our lives (that we may not clearly see). All of us are like automobiles folks, we all have blindspots! Personal mortification should take place before most anything else. That’s why the Apostle Paul wrote, “Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself an those who hear you.”

(pictures from Provocations and Pantings)

New contributor

2006-05-05T06:26:00.000-07:00

How about a warm tennis court applause for new Expository Thoughts contributor Rich Ryan. I will give everyone the 411 on Rich later but it's Friday and you know what that means for preachers.

T4G Statement

2006-05-04T15:29:00.000-07:00

The "Together for the Gospel" statement on doctrine has been posted in final form here at the main web site (a PDF version can be found here).

Borrowed Authority and "Pomo" problems: Part Two

2006-05-04T07:35:00.000-07:00

I noted in my last post, “A pomo does not accept any ideology as objective and consequently authoritative. They will engage in “mutually beneficial dialogues” so long as all involved admit to bringing subjective views which carry no absolute authority. Then, without warning, they borrow authoritative speech to assert their ideas and marginalize opponents for naively believing in objectivity.” For example:

Emerging Parenthood
“Son, I hope you can learn the value of listening to our perspective…our contribution to family dialogue could perhaps offer a fresh look at this moral/ethical matter. Of course, we’re not saying that we are right or that your choices fall short of some fixed standard of wisdom. We just want to continue forging an authentic relationship with you…one of give and take…where we all benefit from each other’s emerging journey”

Emerging Scholastics
“Students, the title of this class, Ethics you can rely on, is perhaps misleading. Our semester objective is to teach…er…uh…suggest that there are basic fixed…I mean…common sense…well---common enough anyway---principles that seem to represent t-t-truths we can use to develop ethical and moral wisdom…wait…not absolute wisdom, but a kind of relationally-validated set of guidelines we might pose as “wise” for authentic living. These objectives will be on the test, and will count as 50% of your semester grade! Does everyone feel they understand the variables for success here?”

Emerging Economics
“Sir, you say that when you agreed to the terms of your loan, you read the contract and accepted the normative, standard meaning of the words used? Well, this is an unfortunate turn of events indeed, because in order for this institution to enjoy an authentic relationship with you we need the freedom to prepare loan contracts with our own personal “story” as a backdrop. It would have been fiscally advantageous for you to become personally familiar with both your loan officers life-narrative and this lender’s emerging history. Perhaps then you would have been closer to a true understanding of the terms of your loan. There is little we can do now, except possibly extend your payment due date another 10 days, 10 being taken to mean a variable number of days chosen to reflect the best possible help in paying your obligation while getting to know us better. Now, would you like to include the required $100.00 overdue charges with your payment today?”

Emerging Nuptials
“Brian and Cheryl, does each of you willingly stand alongside the other, as your always free and therefore authentically changing friend? Will you express your kind of love to each other with the guarantee that neither will take the other at their initial word? Will you seek to learn the other’s peculiarities, while accepting the reality that “learning” means never truly knowing anything for sure? And will you both acknowledge that human relationships can only become authentic when two people realize they can never presume to really understand each other? Lastly, do you both commit to never taking these vows as meaning any one thing at all? Then, by the authority…umm…rather the selection of myself as your conjoiner, I now pronounce that you could be---if you so choose to understand it this way---Brian and Cheryl together for now…an authentic, but always emerging story of two people.”

Emerging Hermeneutics
Don’t even go there…

The point should be obvious…pomo’s should “argue” within the framework of their own epistemology. You’re allowed to assert that I’m not objective, but you forfeit the right to do so with equilateral privilege or authority. See no objectivity, hear no normative meaning, speak no conviction!

Together for the Gospel (PT 1)

2006-05-03T06:25:00.000-07:00

I had the privilege to represent my home church (www.fbccarmel.com) at the recent Together for the Gospel conference (T4TG). The event took place in Louisville about 10 minutes away from Southern Seminary. T4TG was hosted by Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, and CJ Mahaney. They invited three of their heros (MacArthur, Sproul, and Piper) to join them for this conference. These leaders have an accurate understanding of the evangelical landscape. They know the gospel is constantly under attack from those outside the church and by some within the church as well.
John MacArthur encouraged these leaders to write an official statement affirming what they believe concerning the fundamentals of the faith. I’ve included the opening prologue below:

We are brothers in Christ united in one great cause - to stand together for the Gospel. We are convinced that the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been misrepresented, misunderstood, and marginalized in many churches and among many who claim the name of Christ. Compromise of the Gospel has led to the preaching of false gospels, the seduction of many minds and movements, and the weakening of the church's Gospel witness.
As in previous moments of theological and spiritual crisis in the church, we believe that the answer to this confusion and compromise lies in a comprehensive recovery and reaffirmation of the Gospel - and in Christians banding together in Gospel churches that display God's glory in this fallen world.
We are also brothers united in deep concern for the church and the Gospel. This concern is specifically addressed to certain trends within the church today. We are concerned about the tendency of so many churches to substitute technique for truth, therapy for theology, and management for ministry.
We are also concerned that God's glorious purpose for Christ's church is often eclipsed in concern by so many other issues, programs, technologies, and priorities. Furthermore, confusion over crucial questions concerning the authority of the Bible, the meaning of the Gospel, and the nature of truth itself have gravely weakened the church in terms of its witness, its work, and its identity.
We stand together for the Gospel - and for a full and gladdening recovery of the Gospel in the church. We are convinced that such a recovery will be evident in the form of faithful Gospel churches, each bearing faithful witness to the glory of God and the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

2800 pastors and lay leaders joined together in this common affirmation of Christian unity. Of course their are many ungodly ecumenical movements that seek to downplay truth for the sake of so-called peace/unity; this is NOT one of those movements. Nate Busenitz posted some great thoughts on this very issue at http://faithandpractice.blogspot.com/ (see 4/25/06 post). It’s great to see Christians come together with a common faith and a common mission. Despite our disagreements over issues like tongues, believers baptism, eschatology, infant salvation, etc. we do stand together for the gospel.

Borrowed Authority and "Pomo" problems: Part One

2006-05-02T13:15:00.000-07:00

Offering a serious critique of the postmodern mind is becoming a bit like learning algebraic theorems. Just when you’ve put your finger on one of the “tenets”, an advocate simply changes a variable and “viola!”, you haven’t quite solved for p. In fact, postmodernism is by definition a system of ever-changing variables as numerous as its adherents. In the hallowed halls of postmodern thought, truly objective knowledge is unattainable. Should anyone dare to imagine that they’ve discovered a kernel of information free of personal subjective bias they are, well in a word, picayune.

One particular frustration of mine is the postmodernist’s (hereafter referred to as “pomo”) very bad habit of defending themselves in utter disregard for their own rules. Allow me to illustrate. A pomo does not accept any ideology as objective and consequently authoritative. They will engage in “mutually beneficial dialogues” so long as all involved admit to bringing subjective views which carry no absolute authority. Then, without warning, they borrow authoritative speech to assert their ideas and marginalize opponents for naively believing in objectivity.

Now listen…if you’re going to be a consistent pomo, you must learn to sleep in the bed you’ve made. Nothing you declare, argue, postulate, defend, or teach as universal is allowed! By your own admission, the views you advance (even those regarding your opponents) are riddled with subjective biases that must be embraced before any “true” ground is gained. You can never “declare” anything as though it were true in any objective sense. Every argument you make is merely a game of wits, accomplishing nothing except to amuse the players. You must never even hint at a proposition with any authority, for you have considered authoritative speech unhealthy. Should you ever teach, please qualify every notion with the statement “this is just my biased opinion and should not be considered important enough to follow”.

(Editor’s note: part two will offer a few examples of this “borrowed authority” trend).

T4G "Rap" Up

2006-04-28T17:51:00.000-07:00

In the future I will leave blogging conferences to the experts because I neither found the time or the energy to carry-out such a task. Thankfully you can see a wonderful recap of each session here and plenty of photos here. Highlights for me were Lig Duncan's message on "Preaching the Old Testament" which was simply the best I have ever heard on the subject by a mile (he can rap too, see picture). I got to hang-out and worship with Dr. Purgatorio who is such a cool guy and very encouraging to be around. I briefly met Dr. Fide-O Robertson as well and managed to get away before anyone saw me conspiring with him. I caught-up with old friends and some new ones. I will remember this conference for a long time to come. I began the week preaching a very forgettable sermon that left me ministerialy depressed but ended the week greatly encouraged and ready to pursue, renew, and reshape my life as a minister of the wondrous Gospel.

T4G Day One

2006-04-26T20:20:00.000-07:00

The session kicked off tonight in grand fashion and was meaningful, deliberate, convicting, and worshipful (and any other positive adjectives you might think of). Mark Dever preached the opening session on "The Pastor's understanding of his own role." His text was from 1 Corinthians 4 and his points were:

"Three Marks of a Real Minister"
1.Cross-centered message
2.Cross-centered life
3.Cross-centered followers

I needed to hear this sermon in a big way and the Lord has certainly renewed some dormant thoughts, attitudes, and convictions that have gathered dust in my life. All praise to Christ.

The conference is a sea of church leaders from wall to wall. The fellowship is very close...literally. I have enjoyed seeing old friends from seminary and blog celebrities. For a real blog recap see Tim Challies here.

If you see me please introduce yourself, I would love to connect with as many of you as possible. Now here are some candids from the day:
Eric Bancroft who is in competition with C. J. Mahaney for slickest scalp (what's the deal with shaved heads and Sovereign Grace Ministries anyway?).

Marc "Purgatorio" Heinrich

Allen "Country boy will survive" Cagle

Ben Holland chatting with new friend Zach.

"A Mighty Fortress is Our Tavern"?????

2006-04-24T05:26:00.000-07:00

My wife will tell you that I have a special skill that is totally useless. I can take almost any popular tune and rewrite the lyrics in almost a split second. I especially love to take cherished love ballads and recast them into the farcical drivel that they truly deserve. Somewhat related is the common misnomer that many of the great hymns were actually pub songs from the old country rewritten with a more biblical lyric. Someone even told me once (with a straight face) that “A Mighty Fortress is Our God” was originally a bar tune. The wife and I once saw the lapsed Lutheran, Garrison Keilor, at the Hollywood Bowl where we sang the old song in German right after he repeated the same historical faux paux. Thankfully Gene Edward Veith sets the historical record straight,

“For the record, Luther did not take "bar tunes" and put biblical words to them. That legend comes from a comical misunderstanding. Someone apparently heard a music historian referring to Luther's use of the "bar form," which refers to a stanza structure, not to what drunks sing in a tavern. Luther did borrow and adapt tunes from earlier hymns, medieval chants, and contemporary composers, but a good number of his melodies were his own original compositions.”

See the full article here.

On the road with T4G

2006-04-23T20:52:00.000-07:00

Some of us will be here all week soaking up sermons, ministry insight and fellowship at the T4G Conference. I will be blogging the conference at Expository Thoughts. Be sure to check out Challies who will also be blogging the conference. You can also find the official blog of the conference here. If you're going drop us a line.

An elder's children: believing or faithful?

2006-04-20T12:50:00.000-07:00

Dr. Andreas Kostenberger has posted an article on the thorny issue of Titus 1:6 "children who believe" (NASB, ESV, NIV, NLT) or "faithful children" (NKJV). His article is from his forthcoming commentary on 1-2 Timothy, Titus in the new revised edition of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. For a similar take see Dr. Bill Barrick's helpful insight on Titus 1:6 here.

For a differnet take on this issue see the note on Titus 1:6 in The MacArthur Study Bible or his commentary on the same.

Shepherd's Conf. Resources

2006-04-20T00:22:00.000-07:00

Notes from the recent Shepherd's Conference are now on the web here. Notes from earlier years can be found here.

HT: Nathan Busenitz

The Pastor As Theologian

2006-04-18T12:37:00.000-07:00

Al Mohler has written, "Every pastor is called to be a theologian. This may come as a surprise to some pastors, who see theology as an academic discipline taken during seminary rather than as an ongoing and central part of the pastoral calling. Nevertheless, the health of the church depends upon its pastors functioning as faithful theologians--teaching, preaching, defending, and applying the great doctrines of the faith."

See the full article here.

Does God need a PR man?

2006-04-17T09:48:00.000-07:00

I found this article from the New York Times Magazine interesting for the fact that it sees something unusal about God needing a public relations person. The article is about PR agent Larry Ross but the author notices something about Rick Warren (one of Ross's clients) that many evangelicals fail to grasp:

"Warren's book "The Purpose-Driven Life" has sold more than 25 million copies, making it the best-selling hardcover book of nonfiction ever published in the United States, and some say Saddleback has more in common with Google or Starbucks, at least in scope, than the typical church. Warren has a public and a brand to manage."

As for Ross the article asks the obvious question:

"The Kingdom of God itself is a client of sorts. Publicity, marketing and branding are his ministry. So the real question becomes, Why does God need someone to sell him?"

New preaching articles from IX Marks

2006-04-17T09:42:00.000-07:00

Of note for expositors in the new IX Marks newsletter:

Dever, McKnight, the Atonement and a question few are asking

2006-04-14T11:46:00.000-07:00

Long story short: Mark Dever has posted an excellent article on the atonement which has Scot McKight in a huff. Others like Phil Johnson have caught-on to McKnight's obvious hypocrisy but the whole thing presents a question that few are asking: Would McKnight have these problems with Dever's explanation and defense of penal substitution if he (McKnight) did not hold to his various source critical views of the Gospels? I do think it matters and the two are related. Dever notes this in his article and Denny Burk asks a similar question in the comment thread of McKnight's post. Burk questions, "I would be interested to hear you respond to Dever’s suggestion that you have rejected “Mark’s theologizing” of Jesus’s words in Mark 10:45." So would I Denny because there is a source critical approach to the text of the Gospels that appears to be driving McKnight's theology. Until such an issue is dealt with this argument will continue to be played by different sets of rules and on different playing fields.

Interview with Bryan Chapell

2006-04-11T20:04:00.000-07:00

Bryan Chapell, President of Covenant Seminary, delivers some practical wisdom for expositors in this interview entitled "The Truth About Expository Preaching."

If your spouse or roommate were to roll you out of bed at 3 A.M. and ask, "What is the sermon about this Sunday morning?" if you cannot answer in one crisp sentence, the sermon's not ready to preach. You need an idea people can grasp. If the sermon’s idea is, "In the Babylonian incarceration of God's people, they suffered for seventy years to determine what God's plan was and never could determine it..." and you keep talking, that idea is not going to pass the 3 A.M. test. We need something like "God remains faithful to faithless people," something that's crisp.

See the complete interview here.

Preaching OT Narrative

2006-04-07T09:06:00.000-07:00

A young seminary student I know (younger than me anyway) recently finished his M.Div course work from the seminary he was attending and lamented the fact that he was graduating with plenty of helpful information and valuable experience but a few areas were never sufficiently covered in class lectures. The most glaring example he said, was instruction on how to preach from the narrative portions of Scripture and primarily those from the OT. Since I didn’t attend the same seminary as this fellow I can’t vouch for the accuracy of his complaint. Nevertheless, as I reflect on my own experience in seminary and that of fellow ministers with whom I have discussed this issue, there is a general consensus that preaching OT narrative is a weak point among expositors today. Another side to this dilemma is that many who do preach narrative resort to allegorizing and “character studies” rather than getting at the original meaning and then its implications for the modern hearer. Also, much of the OT narrative preaching that I have heard has lacked a God-centered focus. Now all of this is simply one person’s observation but I suspect that it might be a larger problem beyond my own perception.

One of the ways I have tried to overcome my own weaknesses in this area is to simply jump off the cliff of fear and just do it. So currently, I have put a much longer series of the Gospel of Matthew on hold and I’m preaching through the book of Ruth. At the same time I have tried to read anything and everything on the subject of narrative preaching. I came across the following simple but helpful reminder from Daniel Block in his commentary on Judges-Ruth”. Block says we have to ask

“the right questions of the text: (1) What does this account tell us about God? (2) What does it tell us about the human condition? (3) What does it tell us about the world? (4) What does it tell us about the people of God—their collective relationship with Him? (5) What does it tell us of the individual believer’s life of faith?” (604).

For a more detailed treatment of preaching narrative I would recommend “Guidelines for Understanding and Proclaiming Old Testament Narratives” by Steven D. Mathewson as a starting point. There is still much work that needs to be done in this area in the way of helpful materials and resources. If you know of any please let us know by way of comment.

How to make a man of God

2006-04-07T08:20:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Sean at tohu va bohu for reminding us of this classic statement from MacArthur.

“How to Make a Man of God”

Fling him into his office. Tear the “Office” sign from the door and nail on the sign, “Study.” Take him off the mailing list. Lock him up with his books and his typewriter and his Bible. Slam him down on his knees before texts and broken hearts and the flock of lives of a superficial flock and a holy God. Force him to be the one man in our surfeited communities who knows about God.
Throw him into the ring to box with God until he learns how short his arms are. Engage him to wrestle with God all the night through. And let him come out only when he’s bruised and beaten into being a blessing.

Shut his mouth forever spouting remarks, and stop his tongue forever tripping lightly over every nonessential. Require him to have something to say before he dares break the silence.
Bend his knees in the lonesome valley. Burn his eyes with weary study. Wreck his emotional poise with worry for God. And make him exchange his pious stance for a humble walk with God and man. Make him spend and be spent for the glory of God.

Rip out his telephone. Burn up his ecclesiastical success sheets. Put water in his gas tank. Give him a Bible and tie him to the pulpit. And make him preach the Word of the living God!
Test him. Quiz him. Examine him. Humiliate him for his ignorance of things divine. Shame him for his good comprehension of finances, batting averages, and political in-fighting. Laugh at his frustrated effort to play psychiatrist. Form a choir and raise a chant and haunt him with it night and day-”Sir, we would see Jesus.”

When at long last he dares assay the pulpit, ask him if he has a word from God. If he does not, then dismiss him. Tell him you can read the morning paper and digest the television commentaries, and think through the day’s superficial problems, and manage the community’s weary drives, and bless the sordid baked potatoes and green beans, ad infinitum, better than he can. Command him not to come back until he’s read and reread, written and rewritten, until he can stand up, worn and forlorn, and say, “Thus saith the Lord.”

Break him across the board of his ill-gotten popularity. Smack him hard with his own prestige. Corner him with questions about God. Cover him with demands for celestial wisdom. And give him no escape until he’s back against the wall of the Word. And sit down before him and listen to the only word he has left-God’s Word. Let him be totally ignorant of the down-street gossip, but give him a chapter and order him to walk around it, camp on it, sup with it, and come at last to speak it backward and forward, until all he says about it rings with the truth of eternity.

And when he’s burned out by the flaming Word, when he’s consumed at last by the fiery grace blazing through him, and when he’s privileged to translate the truth of God to man, finally transferred from earth to heaven, then bear him away gently and blow a muted trumpet and lay him down softly. Place a two-edged sword in his coffin, and raise the tomb triumphant. For he was a brave soldier of the Word. And ere he died, he had become a man of God.

Rhetorical Device in Expository Ministry: similes and paraphrases

2006-04-05T13:22:00.000-07:00

This is an ongoing series on the use of rhetorical device in preaching with a side focus on the preaching of Calvin. These are simply informal observations and various stray thoughts that I have brought together on this broad subject. Comments and ideas are welcome.

2. Similes and synonyms

John Stott has written, “Preaching is an activity of bridge-building between the revealed Word and the contemporary world.” This bridge is made with words that are preached. Those words will either be like a bridge that has been left in disrepair or one that is well-built with clear markings. Synonyms and similes are rhetorical devices that will help the expositor build the bridge more effectively. To use a synonym in preaching is to use a different word to provide more “color” and “flesh” to the point being made. A simile will accomplish the same thing yet with a larger comparative phrase.

Hughes Old tells us that Calvin used “a generous supply of synonyms to convey the fullness” of his teaching. Old assures us that to read Calvin in “sixteenth-century French is a pure delight for a lexicographer.” Nevertheless, and I’m sure Old would agree, the power of preaching does not rest in the choice of words and phrases. To be sure, preaching is more than this in every way but it is not less than this. Therefore, preachers should weigh their words carefully and make full use of the range of their vocabulary to communicate the message of the Word of God. Avoid vagaries and words that lack concrete clarity. Work hard at precision and explanation while avoiding needless redundancies. Examples of similes can be found all over Scripture: “don’t be tossed like the waves of the sea” and “the kingdom of heaven is like…”

3. Paraphrases

In one sense the whole sermon is a paraphrase of the text we are preaching. If it’s not then we might be missing the point of the text completely. By definition, an exposition is an expansion and retelling of a text. We are not inventing new material but we are explaining and applying material that has already been delivered. Our job is to unpack the words, grammar, meaning, and context while repackaging them all in a clear and natural style that exalts the Word through the sermon. To paraphrase means quit literally to rephrase a particular statement in different words and phrases. This can be an effective means of communication and chances are you already do this in your sermon but recognizing where you use it and how to refine it will make your usages all the more clear.

A paraphrased statement in a sermon might begin with, “It’s as if Jesus is saying…” or “Moses is essentially telling the people that…” We may paraphrase a particular statement or even an event. The latter is when we describe the situation in “brighter color” with the help of background material and knowledge we gained in the introductory phase of our study. Certainly, the larger context plays a role here as well. Take for example the shortest verse in the NT which says, “Jesus wept.” A basic paraphrase would simply say something like this:

“Here is Jesus standing outside the tomb of his dear friend Lazarus, weeping."

This paraphrase conveys a little more emotion and color than the original verse but not much. However, if we said:

“Here is the transcendent God of the universe, the one who will be exalted above all things, who will sit at the right hand of the Father, being fully God yet showing the humility of being fully man. The one we see here outside of this tomb is not strong in the eyes of the world but like Isaiah said ‘he was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.’ This is the one who is weeping for His dear friend and this is the one who sympathizes with our weaknesses. YET it is this weeping man that will also call his friend from that very tomb. He will command a rotting corpse to get up and make its way out for all to see when He shouts the command, ‘LAZURUS, COME FORTH!’ Here inside of these two words, “Jesus wept” we see a humble man moved by the death of a friend. Yet the text also shows a man who is fully God, who is sovereign Lord, creator and sustainer of all life. We must see Him in all His fullness here. He is not a dispassionate or reclusive god or even a mere man who is a slave to his emotions. Here we have the God-Man. Sad yet sovereign, moved yet the Mover, and compassionate yet infinitely powerful.”

On a practical level, I try not to go overboard editing my manuscript notes. However, I do check them for redundancies which can often be cured with a synonym or a clearer phrase. Make time to give a final edit to your notes, even if it’s a once over just before you preach. Go back to your most recent sermon and notice where these rhetorical devices would have proved more effective. You might take note of patterns or stylistic problems that can translate into hindrances for those who are there to hear your message. However, guard your editing practices from hyper self-criticism. Biblical sermons are not works of art without stylistic problems or imperfections. I have seen some preachers go overboard in editing and get caught up in the “romance” of crafting a sermon. T. H. L. Parker is wise to comment about the expositor that “a proper humility before God and modesty concerning himself and his capabilities are not to hinder the preacher from the bold assertion of the authority of the message he has to deliver. Indeed, it is a dereliction of his duty if he does not claim that authority” (Calvin’s Preaching, 44).

"a feeling of desperation"

2006-04-04T16:02:00.000-07:00

"...all genuine preacing is rooted in a feeling of desperation. The preacher wakes up on the Lord's Day morning and he can smell the smoke of hell on one side and feel the crisp breezes of heaven on the other. he then looks down at his pitiful notes and he says to himself, 'Who do I think I am kidding? Is this all there is? Though oftentimes a source of great anxiety, this is the proper conclusion for the preacher of the cross. He is ever mindful of his inadequacies in relationship to the immensity of the task at hand" (Atruro Azurdia, Spirit Empowered Preaching, p. 92).

HT: Allen

Is propositional truth now passé?

2006-03-31T10:10:00.000-08:00

I overheard this excellent thought on the preaching of propositional truth from Richard Phillips (here).

“It strikes me that one reason for the attacks on the "propositional" nature of biblical revelation is that academia has subtly changed our attitudes about receiving it. The quote Derek provided assumes that those who emphasize propositional truth think of themselves as scientists who coldly sift through evidence. But, biblically, the prophetic and apostolic idea is that of court testimony. (The "shaliach" background for apostleship especially supports this.) God has given "expert" testimony, with unimpeachable qualifications to support what he says. Our role is not to "study" the evidence the way a scientist does, but to respond faithfully to what we have heard. When we realize that we, not the evidence, are the ones on trial, then we may rightly emphasize the propositional content of what God has revealed in His Word.”

Interview with Jerry Wragg: PART TWO

2006-03-31T09:05:00.000-08:00

This is part two of a two part interview with "Expository Thoughts" contributor Jerry Wragg. Jerry is the pastor-teacher of Grace Immanuel Bible Church in Jupiter, Florida.

7. What dead preachers inspire you? Why?

Tough to be concise here…
Paul – For his tireless preaching and teaching of the whole counsel of God. It’s hard to imagine a time in history needing greater discipline than our own era, but Paul’s ministry burden, though exponentially towering above my own, never overtook his singular focus of sacrificially giving all that was required. “Night and day with tears…”---Amazing!
John Chrysostom – For the serious attention he gave to preaching for life change. It has been said of him that “he taught…like a pastor of souls.” His systematic expositions, though profound, were marked by clarity and simplicity.
John Calvin – A name that has no doubt inspired every truly thinking preacher, but one that brings sobriety to my ministry. Though Calvin privately endured unspeakable infirmities, his productivity was nonetheless staggering. Yet, his own assessment of his work is best captured by a comment to his fellow elders, “I have had much infirmity that you have had to bear, and the sum total of all that I have done has been worth nothing.” Such humility without self-pity was the reason for his usefulness.
George Whitefield, William Grimshaw, John Berridge, Henry Venn, John Wesley, and a handful of others who literally “preached” England into a reformation! These men inspire because their preaching was so thoroughly driven by the highest exaltation of Christ and the abhorrence of man-centeredness. Such unwavering preaching turned an entire darkened nation and culture upside down.
C.H. Spurgeon – For the skill (among so many he possessed) of illustrating truth from life with piercing humor and clarity, while never turning the pulpit into vaudeville. His balance along almost every theological knife-edge betrays hours of tireless meditation upon scripture. What a model!
Martyn Lloyd-Jones – For the theological depth of both his preaching and his churchmanship. Here was a pastor whose personal devotion to Christ saturated his sermons. His teaching ministry was powerful because he first took heed to himself.

8. Do you have hope that a new generation of young preachers will pick up where the old guys have left off?

I truly believe that God has already been preparing and using a crop of young hearts that will stand with the greats of the past and boldly expound scripture, even to their own harm. Such men, however, must be willing to step out of the shadows and proclaim the truth against a ferocious liberalism that will not silence easily. Perhaps the true expositors of today (e.g. MacArthur, Sproul, Piper, et.al.) are God’s catalysts for a strong movement of unshakeable preachers with passion, discernment, authority, and skill.

9. What are common mistakes you see young preachers making?

Regarding textual mistakes, young preachers tend to disseminate more exegetical data than are necessary for clarity. A good check and balance is to ask four simple questions:
1.) Will the passage be confusing without this particular feature?
2.) Is this information critical for settling a doctrinal matter and exposing clearly erroneous views?
3.) Is my grasp of the text thorough enough to manage and resolve further questions such information may trigger?
4.) Can I make a clear bridge between this information and the rhetorical function of the passage so that the hearers see its import?
Also, young preachers (me included, though some might dispute the “young” part) fall into a host of textual errors by letting their language skills atrophe. It helps to regularly read books on interpretation, identifying bad habits and areas of ignorance. A good book to start with is D.A. Carson’s Exegetical Fallacies.

Regarding tactical ministry mistakes, many young pastors believe they have the confidence of their flock after only a short while in the saddle. Consequently, they often attempt to change long-standing paradigms with a loaded sermon or two. It takes several years before the sheep begin to know and trust their shepherd’s voice. Young preachers, no matter how glib, must learn that it requires hundreds of expositions before a flock trusts the heart behind the message. The congregation needs time to observe how the pastor approaches each different scriptural genre, challenging doctrinal disputes, confusing ethical questions, personal struggles, ministry conflicts, and character weaknesses. Preaching effectively to a trusting flock takes several foundational years of humble service before heads will turn when you speak.

10. How much does the culture influence what you will say in a sermon?

It depends upon the angle of the question. My task is to expound the mind and heart of God in each passage, carefully explaining the author’s intent and implications for both the ancient culture and today’s Christian. The moral issues of contemporary culture should not have any bearing upon a proper transliteration and interpretation of a passage’s meaning. Having discovered the author’s normative meaning and principal implications for the ancient culture, I must work to understand how each propositional truth forms a bridge of implications for God’s people today. The timelessness of some truths is obvious while others make bridge-building more intricate and challenging. In this light, a pastor must have a wise grasp of contemporary culture from three vantage points:
1.) He must know God’s character and redemptive purposes for His people which serve as a timeless framework for understanding how man should relate to God in any culture.
2.) He should regularly review and humbly acknowledge the truth about man’s sinful nature so that cultural shifts, religious or pagan, do not lead to pragmatic, man-centered, or shallow moralizing. In other words, man’s heart is the same in every era, and preaching for surface change by focusing on the trendy cultural hot-buttons may temporarily “touch” the sheep, but their appetite for such superficial “relevance” will starve them to death!
3.) He should develop critical thinking skills for demonstrating exactly how the ancient text presents contemporary implications which must be applied to one’s heart and life. Such skill comes from the direct and habitual application of truth to unbiblical thinking, motivations, affections, passions, and convictions in one’s own life first.
Many of today’s books on preaching attempt to counter poorly organized, passionless, and disconnected sermons by strongly emphasizing the contemporary side of the homiletical bridge. I agree that a properly interpreted passage without an exhortation to change is not preaching. Unfortunately, however, pastors have taken these calls for balance to mean that authorial intent and biblical culture are not our first concern. Congregations have been all too willing to champion this push to “make sermons relevant”, leaving the pastor pinched between his training and the desire to “connect”. What is the solution? Remember that building the bridge in reverse (contemporary to ancient) places the authority with contemporary man rather than with God’s revelation. Surface problems and their solutions are superimposed upon biblical truth so that God’s mind is not understood, His power not experienced, and no actual bridge for life change established. The result is sheep who scarf up a steady diet of feel-good candy which offers no real nourishment, and a pastor who spends less time harkening unto God’s truth and more energy searching for “connecting points” with contemporary culture.

Interview with Jerry Wragg

2006-03-29T12:55:00.000-08:00

This is part one of a two part interview with "Expository Thoughts" contributor Jerry Wragg. Jerry is the pastor-teacher of Grace Immanuel Bible Church in Jupiter, Florida.

1. Have you always been a preacher? What did you do before ministry?

After four years with the Air Force, I worked for a defense contractor as a counter-intelligence representative for secret military weapons programs.

2. What about preaching challenges you the most?

The time-pressures and leadership challenges of ministry make it very difficult to read and absorb all the relevant material on a given passage or topic so as to handle it thoroughly.

3. What books outside of Scripture have most shaped your understanding of preaching?

Toward An Exegetical Theology (Kaiser)
Preaching and Preachers (Lloyd-Jones)
The Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (Broadus)
The Preacher and Preaching (Logan [especially Boice’s chapter])
Lectures To My Students (Spurgeon)

4. What is the biggest obstacle for today’s pastor who wants to devote himself to expository preaching?

Utter confusion in the world of hermeneutics and exegesis! True that today’s pragmatic methodologies publish daily assaults on Bible exposition, but the real beast behind that false prophet is a wholesale war on objectivity and authority in hermeneutical studies. My advice: Read everything you can on today’s hermeneutical challenges, work hard on biblical languages, and build deep convictions about the essentials of the faith.

5. What role did/does formal education play in your growth as a preacher?

Though formal studies at an institution may not be possible for everyone, it should be the pursuit of every Bible expositor. For me, some course work could have been eliminated, but the disciplines needed for long hours of study were forged in the fires of school work and research. Furthermore, certain teachers marked my life as a pastor-preacher, shaping and molding my character around the qualities that build faithfulness, endurance, and integrity. Finally, it would be very difficult to gain the necessary Greek and Hebrew skills without the steady work and scrutiny of the classroom.

6. What sermon series are you doing right now?

I’m preaching through John’s gospel on Sunday mornings. I’ve just finished John 14: 1-6, and will look to vv 7ff in the weeks ahead. Having completed Philippians in the evenings, I am teaching a series called “Reflections on Redemption”, looking at each glorious facet of our salvation. Haven’t decided which book study to do next on Sunday night.

Rhetorical Device in Expository Ministry: The Outline

2006-03-28T09:37:00.000-08:00

Probably no device should be more obvious to your congregation than your outline. Our people may miss certain nuances of our argumentation, they may fail to grasp weightier theological insights but at the very least they should walk away with some sort of outline of the text just preached. The goal of which is to bring them back to the Scriptures where they can plainly see how the text unfolds, how your proposition was rooted in the text, and finally how it drives the hearer to worship the Triune God. Some preachers are content to use the same outline in preaching that they devised in their exegesis. This is unfortunate for many reasons, chief of which is it misses an opportunity to do more than merely communicate some facts about the Scripture. A good homiletical outline does more than show the people that you arranged the basic thrust of the pericope. Through the outline, the preacher has the opportunity to call the congregation to faithfulness, inspire them to action, issue the commands of the Lord or raise questions for further reflection (the options are of course not limited to these examples). One way to examine the nature of your outline is ask yourself, “what is this outline calling the people to do?” Is it asking a question, issuing a command, or merely restating a biblical truth? There’s nothing wrong with plainly stating biblical truth. In fact, that is one of the key objectives of the sermon. However, the outline should give the people thoughts, ideas, imperatives and questions on which to hang the meat of the text (I have found that imperatival statements and questions make for effective outlines but one should not limit himself so as to become predictable or even redundant).

For John Calvin, outlines in preaching were more implicit than explicit. They were more felt than seen. Part of the reason for this absence of clear “points” (in the modern usage of the idea) in Calvin’s preaching was his possible overcorrection from the earlier forms of scholastic preaching. Reading Calvin, it becomes clear that medieval theologians like Peter Lombard (c. 1100-1160) and the latter Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225-1347) had both positive and negative effects on his preaching style. Hughes Old notes that scholastic preaching with its emphasis on rigorous form would have been the preaching that Calvin heard while growing up in Paris. The scholastics forced the Scriptures into their preconceived categories of sententiae or summa which more often than not missed the point of the given text and obscured the message of the gospel. Seeing this, the preaching Reformers were the first to largely move away from the scholastic method and in turn embraced a method of expository preaching rooted in grammatical-historical exegesis. Hughes Old writes that, “Calvin was primarily an expository preacher. From the standpoint of homiletical genre, all his sermons are expository sermons” (The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church: Volume 4 The Age of the Reformation, 93). So Calvin moved sharply away from scholasticism and embraced a “freer” form of outlining the text. A survey of Calvin’s sermons from Galatians, for example, reveal no obvious outline (in the sense of 1, 2, 3, etc.). However, that is not to say that an outline is not present. Calvin relied more on verbal cues than numbered sequences (e.g., “first, then, and finally”). Old notes that this was because Calvin refused “to force a passage of Scripture into neat sermon outlines and yet seems to have a full command of the arts of language” (108). My conclusion is that Calvin had the clear structure of an outlined sermon but used rhetorical devices more effectively in other parts of his expository messages. However, as Calvin and many others have exemplified, an outlined sermon helps one see the interrelatedness of the Scripture and its demands upon the hearer. Effective expository preaching will make ample use of outlines which will guide the hearer into the ancient world of God’s Word so as to see its original meaning and its modern-day application.

Credibility in the Pulpit

2006-03-28T08:04:00.000-08:00

While writing a current series of articles on some of the nuts and bolts of preaching I found this brief article from our friend Nathan Busenitz to be a useful balance. I would suggest that anyone who takes preaching seriously should contemplate Nathan's careful reminder before strapping on the particulars of sermon delivery. He writes:

“There is a danger in focusing too much on the external aspects of delivery—in thinking that preaching consists of a certain formula or assuming that it can be evaluated by the same criteria as secular oration. Biblical preaching is not merely a human endeavor. In fact, its true power is not found in the human source at all. Biblical preaching, then, operates on two levels—the human and the divine—while secular speechmaking operates on the human level only.”

See the full article here.

New preaching interview with David Robertson

2006-03-28T07:56:00.000-08:00

When asked, "How does preaching Christ from all the Scriptures govern the shape of your sermons?" He responded:

"It certainly underwrites everything. Preaching is done as an act of worship and in the context of worship. Therefore it is done in the context of the one we worship. Therefore all preaching is or should be Christ centred/focused. This does not mean that we have to keep saying the name of Jesus or making forced interpretations. The Word is itself the Word of Christ."

See the whole interview here.

Looking for sermons in all the wrong places

2006-03-24T11:18:00.000-08:00

When does quoting someone in a sermon become theft? One pastor writing for Rick Warren's pastors.com said,

"...stop all of this nonsense of spending 25 or 30 hours a week preparing to speak on the weekend. The guys I draw encouragement from – the best communicators in the United States – confess they spend a total of about 15 hours preparing for their message. As I have already said, they get 70 percent of their material from someone else. Remember, Solomon wrote that "there is nothing new under the sun ..." (you can read the full article here).

Here is a fair response to this article in what one pastor calls "Pastoral Plagiarism."

Rhetorical Device in Expository Ministry: A “how-to”

2006-03-22T13:28:00.000-08:00

This is the second installment in a series on the expository ministry of John Calvin.

While no one today has ever heard John Calvin preach, we still have around 1,460 of his extant sermons to study with about another 1,000 manuscripts either missing or destroyed [according to John Leith, “Calvin’s Doctrine of the Proclamation of the Word and Its Significance for Today in Light of Recent Research” in Review and Expositor, (1989), p.29]. Princeton scholar, Hughes Oliphant Old shares an appreciation for Calvin when he says, “few preachers have affected such a tremendous reform in the lives of their congregation as did the Reformer of Geneva.” So what was the chief piece of artillery at Calvin’s disposal and more specifically how did he wield it? Old answers that Calvin, “drew his hearers into the sacred text along with him.” To be sure, Calvin was not the only reformer to enjoy a robust expository preaching ministry. Old tells us that “Calvin had the same tools…which the older Reformers had; it was just that Calvin’s were a bit sharper.” The focus of this essay will examine how Calvin used his “sharper” tools and their benefit to preachers today?

Without going into much detail over definitions, let it be said that Calvin was an expositor homiletically and all his sermons reflected this commitment (see T. H. L. Parker’s, Calvin’s Preaching). He was committed to expository preaching because he believed that the text should be taken at face value and that grammatical-historical exegesis was the only corrective to the allegorical method so prevalent in some of his predecessors. Therefore the principles that one may draw from his example are only true to the source if repeated within a consistent expository ministry that is rooted in sound hermeneutical principles (which should be the subject of another essay all together).

Eye-witness accounts and sermons left behind help us to see that one of the reasons for Calvin’s effectiveness was his use of rhetorical device. Simply put, he was a master of the language and worked hard to make sure that his message was simple in its style yet profound in its content (One of the more lucid analyses of Calvin’s preaching that has contributed to my thinking on this subject is Hughes Oliphant Old’s The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church: Volume 4 The Age of the Reformation, pp.90-134). Rhetorical device refers to the use of the word pictures, questions, metaphors, etc. to communicate the ancient truths of Scripture to a modern audience. To be effective in this is to clearly distill that message, communicate it through individual giftedness all without truncating the original intent of the author(s). Over the next few posts, I will explore each of the following rhetorical devices found in the preaching of Calvin and show how they are rooted in Biblical examples and useful for preaching today.

1. Outlines as device
2. Similes and synonyms
3. Paraphrases
4. The “Negative” or “Corrective”
5. Expansion
6. Contrast
7. Sarcasm/absurdity
8. Simplification
9. Symphonic preaching
10. vocabulary

Reading and Remembering Martyn Lloyd-Jones

2006-03-20T22:21:00.000-08:00

Martyn Lloyd-Jones', "The Doctor" as he was known by his friends and congregation, ministry has been remembered recently due to the 25th anniversary of his death (March 1, 1981). His chief biographer, Iain Murray has penned two helpful articles in The Banner of Truth Magazine on "Dr Lloyd-Jones Twenty-Five Years On" and "Advice On Reading Dr Lloyd-Jones." Other notable resources may be found here and here.

S. Lewis Johnson resources

2006-03-20T22:00:00.000-08:00

Many readers of these pages are familiar with the ministry of the late S. Lewis Johnson. He was one of the finest scholars of the 20th Century who also understood the importance of proclaiming the truth through effective exposition. A vast amount of his expositions and doctrinal studies are available on-line through Believer’s Chapel where he served for many years. See here.

What's that "expository" stuff all about?

2006-03-20T15:17:00.000-08:00

For all the talk around here about "expository this" and "exposition that" it would be helpful to provide a working definition of what we're talking about. Today, Phil Ryken moves us in that direction with this offering from Reformation 21, see here. What do you think abou t this definition?

Trashy Novels

2006-03-20T08:30:00.000-08:00

"Trashy Novel" is the only way I know how to describe anything from the pen of the former Bishop of Newark, NJ, John Shelby Spong. My first encounter was when my philosophy professor at university thought it would be a good idea for his budding students to read Rescuing the Bible from the Hands of Fundamentalism. Let's just say that experiment got real ugly real quick. Spong has continued to put out his brand of ideas over the last decade disclaiming any form of biblical orthodoxy on issues from the virgin birth to homosexuality. His latest work is called The Sins of Scripture where he continues his diatribe against Christianity from the “inside.” I thought about writing a review of it but I was pleased to see Dr. John Makujina had written a fine piece for CT. Spong should not be taken seriously for the merits of his writing because they have as much merit or scholarly insight as a harlequin romance novel. However, he should be taken seriously for the fact that many have been duped by his fanciful research and enormous popular appeal. His publisher, Harper of San Francisco, has made sure that the target audience of his writing is the people that we pastors are entrusted to shepherd and feed. See Makujina’s review here.

Classic Craigen

2006-03-18T19:53:00.000-08:00

For those of us who have sat under the teaching of Dr. Trevor Craigen of The Master's Seminary, we are familiar with his famous syllogisms of systematic theology. Here is one that I found that is specifically for the expositor of Scripture (HT: Apelles).

IF the Illumination of the Holy Spirit is not the giving of new revelation but the internal witness of the Spirit that produces a fullness of conviction about the certainty and the reliability of the Truth, the Word of God, in the mind and heart of the believer AND

IF the Bible itself (1) refers to a growth in knowledge about what it teaches and (2) argues for teaching of the doctrines of Scripture to the believer and (3) calls for the reader to be diligent in his study so that he might rightly divide the Word of Truth AND

IF the Bible reveals that Christ raises up those gifted in teaching and preaching to have oversight of the flock in which they are found AND

IF the doctrine of the ministry of the Spirit is not seen as divorced from the Word of God but as essentially linked to it, using it, and through it working in the lives of God’s own AND

IF the Bible itself places an emphasis on the mind of the believer calling for it to be renewed and strengthened and, in so doing, places before the believer an array of imperatives both negative and positive to which he is expected to respond as he grows in knowledge and application of the Word of God to his own life that he might be spiritually mature

THEN the ministry of preaching and teaching must be (1) linked continually to the Word of God, (2) the product of an earnest study of that Word, (3) the impartation of a body of doctrine as well as that Truth being brought to bear upon life, and (4) carried out with prayer and with an expressed desire for the lives and hearts of the hearers

FURTHER This means that preaching cannot be done without earnest preparation and without proper regard to the context, grammatical and historical, in which it was first given. It entails both an understanding of just what the Spirit caused to be said to those alive at the time of writing and giving AND then carefully determining just what it means for believers who come to its pages after that time

BUT Since preaching will demonstrate to its hearers how the text has been carefully and prayerfully handled as it is interpreted

THEN The one preaching must be very careful to teach by example what he himself desires to be, namely one who properly and rightly handles the Word on which he bases his teaching and exhortation

SO THAT The hearers and fellow-students are left with the distinct realization that no text can be just made to say whatever the speaker wants it to say regardless of its context, that is, the hearer receives constantly a lesson in good Bible study

Shepherd's Fellowship Blog

2006-03-17T11:39:00.000-08:00

The Shepherd's Fellowship now has a blog which should be of interest to preachers. See it here.

Calvin and his critics

2006-03-15T13:07:00.000-08:00

Few names in Christian history have drawn the venomous rancor as that of John Calvin (1509-1564). One may disagree with his exegesis or despise his theology but one cannot easily dismiss Calvin as irrelevant. Sentiments like those of popular historian Will Durant are easy to come by. Durant said, “We shall always find it hard to love the man, John Calvin, who darkened the human soul with the most absurd and blasphemous conception of God in all the long and honored history of nonsense.” It appears that some respond to a caricature of the man rather than what is known of him through historical accounts and his vast body of work. How sad it is that so many truly despise John Calvin but have never read his works or studied his life.

One need not agree with all his conclusions to recognize his considerable influence on Christianity since the time of the Reformation. As for myself, I have come to different conclusions than Calvin in the areas of ecclesiology, sacraments, and eschatology just to name a few. At times I find some of his exegetical conclusions in his commentaries to be forced through the grid of his anti-Rome stance. However, his conclusions are all the more amazing when one considers how little he had to work with in the way of historical precedence. While he consulted the theologians of his day and appealed to the early Church Fathers, his primary focus was upon the text of Scripture. It was his exegesis of the text which bore the fruit of a faithful pulpit ministry. All pastors and theologians should drink deeply from this man’s work for they will taste not only a theologian but a father, a husband, a pastor, and friend who was firmly rooted in real life without the strangle-hold of the ivory-tower mindset. He was a man who was made of clay and yet was greatly used to shape Western Christianity in the post-Reformation world more than any other single individual. Everyone and every persuasion after him from John Owen to Jonathan Edwards, from Karl Barth to Louis Berkof have ridden the coat tails of this great saint. Even none other than his staunchest critic, Jacob Arminius, recognized Calvin’s formidable influence when he wrote:

“Next to the study of the Scriptures which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my pupils to peruse Calvin’s Commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than Helmich himself (a Dutch divine, 1551–1608); for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly valued than all that is handed down to us by the library of the fathers; so that I acknowledge him to have possessed above most others, or rather above all other men, what may be called an eminent spirit of prophecy. His Institutes ought to be studied after the (Heidelberg) Catechism, as containing a fuller explanation, but with discrimination, like the writings of all men.”

Today, while new forms of preaching are being explored, it is Calvin who exemplifies faithful Spirit-filled exposition. Likewise there are some who are shunning proposition-rich systematic theology. Yet it is Calvin who shows us that theology can be more than a set of discombobulated theological statements. I am still hopeful that far from vindicating a man like Calvin, many will rise to the occasion and vindicate the necessity of solid exposition married to the rich substance of systematic theology. This is precisely what Calvin gave his life to and the modern preacher should do no less.

Are you sinfully judgmental?

2006-03-14T13:40:00.000-08:00

I recently picked up Dave Swavely’s new book titled, “Who are you to judge? The Dangers of Judging and Legalism.” I was interested in the subject for a variety of reasons so I thought it may be a good buy/read. Anyone who has been in ministry for anytime has probably been accused of being judgmental, unloving, and/or legalistic.
In my own life I know there are some occasions when this is indeed true. I try and justify my critical spirit claiming “I’m just being discerning.” Sometimes I fall short in this area and thus I see the need for repentance.
There are other times of course when I am misaccused of being unloving or judgmental when I am simply following the principles of 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22, But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil.
Many people in the church today simply lack the will to discern (see Macarthur’s excellent book, “Reckless Faith”). These folks accuse anyone and everyone of everything when it comes to the arena of legalism/judging. All of us see the ramifications of this in the fulfillment of Ephesians 4:14, As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves, and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming.
I decided to start by reading the appendixes of Swavely’s new book. I was intrigued by the title of one, “The Ultimate Human Judgment.” Swavely tries to answer the question, ‘So how can we judge whether someone is a Christian or not?’ Pastor Swavely makes a few good points saying we can never know for certain whether or not someone is genuinely saved. Ultimately only God knows the heart. If someone makes an orthodox profession (p. 185) then we should assume that person is speaking the truth. He writes, “So our relationship to other professing Christians as brothers and sisters is based on a presumption of faith. Or to put it another way, we call them believers, accept them as believers, and treat them as believers.”
I was ok with this appendix until I read the following sentence, “The biblical writers did not attempt to determine or distinguish true believers from false believers within the church. They accepted people’s profession of faith, as long as it was a credible or biblical profession…” Wait a minute! What about the book of 1 John and all the tests that are laid out for us. 1 John 5:13, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.” What about the book of James?
On page 186 Swavely writes, “I would suggest that when someone has professed personal faith in Christ, been baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and identified with the church, we are then under obligation from Scripture to make NO NEGATIVE JUDGMENTS about the validity of his faith” (emphasis mine). I understand where Pastor Dave is trying to go with this but in my mind I do not fully agree. He continues, “That obligation remains even when a professing believer seems to exhibit a lack of fruit, or even if he commits repeated heinous sin, because in those cases the other members of the body are called to encourage, admonish, and if necessary discipline him…”
The problem is most churches baptize anyone who makes a profession of faith and then they do not treat those people as N.T. Christians (through encouragement, admonishment, accountability, discipline, etc). I agree with the author that, “we must think twice before concluding that a fellow member of the body is not a true Christian.” Ultimately God is the one true Judge.
Do you think it is judgmental for churches to withhold baptism for those who profess Christ? My personal desire is NOT to limit baptism only for the spiritually mature or to the super saint. I believe baptism is for any person who professes saving faith in Jesus Christ. I do think it is important to test the profession of faith to determine if it is genuine saving faith as much as is humanly possible (again James and 1 John are so helpful here). I know non-Lordship brethren often accuse Reformed believers of super imposing spiritual conditions on the gospel message. As you know, many people simply do not understand the biblical components of saving “faith.” I concur with Dr. Stuart Scott’s biblical interpretation here.

“Understanding Saving Faith (“believing” - Jn.3:16; 1:12)
a. The Knowledge (content) of the Gospel Facts with Jesus as the object of faith = Noticia (Jn.17:3; Heb. 6:4; 10:26; Jas.2:19)
b. The Agreement (intellectual assent) with the Gospel Facts = Assensus (Mt.13:20; Jn.6:44,65; Acts 26; Heb. 6:4; Jas.2:19)
c. A personal transfer of trust and reliance from oneself to Jesus alone for your Justification = Fiducia.
This involves godly sorrow and repentance for all sin, an about face and an all-out pursuit to love, submit to, fully trust in and follow after the Lord Jesus Christ in obedience to His revealed will by the Spirit’s enablement (grace, Acts 11:18; 2 Ti.2:25). This saving faith will always result in good works (Eph.2:10; Jas.2:26).”

I'm just wondering how Swavely's appendix works itself out? Are these accurate quotes? Do they even matter? Should churches be less restrictive when it comes to membership or baptism? Any thoughts????

Expository Preaching Resources

2006-03-09T20:41:00.000-08:00

Wikipedia on expository preaching.

CT article "Farther In and Deeper Down"

Tom Pennington on "Making the connection"

Bryan Chapell on "The Truth about Expository Preaching"

Carey Hardy on "Turning Exegesis into Exposition"

Tom Ascol on "Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures"

Al Mohler vs. Bill Easum on Preaching

Al Mohler on "Expository Preaching and the Recovery of Christian Worship"

R. L. Dabney on Expository Preaching

Rutherford House editorial on preaching

Augustine the expositor?

2006-03-09T07:04:00.000-08:00

I have been reading Augustine lately. When I was in New Orleans last year (pre-Katrina), I found an old second-hand bookstore in the French Quarter that had a copy of Augustine’s work on the Trinity which also contained his sermons on 1 John. I was generally familiar with his more popular works but reading his sermons has deepened my understanding of Augustine’s expository ministry. Much like Calvin, it is tempting for us to think of Augustine as merely a stuffy theologian but both men were faithful pastors devoted to the exposition of Scripture. After reading his sermons, I found Hughes Oliphant Old’s understanding of Augustine to be spot on:

“In his homiletical work, Augustine gave first importance to expository preaching. This was quite consistent with the whole theological system. Augustine had a strong theology of grace, and a strong theology of grace leads to a strong emphasis on revelation. Sermon after sermon we find our preacher intent on nothing so much as explaining the Holy Scriptures, for there it was that God revealed himself” (from Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church: Volume 2 The Patristic Age, 345-46).

Are preachers "prophets"?

2006-03-08T21:03:00.000-08:00

Should preachers today be considered "prophets"? Dr. Bill Barrick of The Master's Seminary argues that "foretelling" and "forthtelling" is a popular yet misleading distinction. He writes:

"Lest the reader misunderstand, let me make something clear: I am not talking about the confusion of the charismatic preachers and theologians. No, I am talking about non-charismatic, evangelical preachers, teachers, and theologians who are either confused or are creating confusion."

See the full article here.

Diotrephes is Back: Part Three (final)

2006-03-08T13:03:00.000-08:00

Love of Power

The lust for power in the ministry is equally destructive and always leads to isolation from those authorities to whom we are accountable. Diotrephes opposed John’s Apostolic leadership because he viewed others as obstacles to the furtherance of his own power and control. Verse 10 says he was “not satisfied with” mere slander, but also tried to hinder the outreach ministries of other churches. In his resentment he refused to serve a traveling band of missionaries (“…neither does he…receive the brethren” – v.10). Leaders who love control are always suspicious of others because they fear the loss of importance or status. Scripture teaches that we are never to shepherd “…as lording it over those allotted to [our] charge” (1 Peter 5:3). The sheep are a delegated responsibility from the Chief Shepherd to whom we shall give an account. When a leader does not tremble at the very thought of accountability to Christ he is left to his petty intimidations and oppressive tactics. Anyone who stood against Diotrephes became a target of his bitterness. He manipulated his own congregation, incited them to disfellowship with anyone who went against his orders. This is not leadership but personal domination! How can you know whether you have fallen into the power-hungry trap? Examine your life and look for the following evidences: Viewing others as a threat to your success; Unteachable when contradicted; Letting others be blamed for your failed decisions; Withholding important resources and information needed by others; Unwilling to delegate responsibility. These are the marks of self-centered and self-protective leadership. The body of Christ suffers greatly when shepherds are lured away by power and praise. We must work against such weaknesses by cultivating a Christ-focused heart and mind. Paul’s calling as an Apostle was not to be undermined, but he personally saw himself as a nobody (2 Corinthians 12:11). A tyrant in the ministry will foster a church full of abusers who fight each other for recognition. Loyalty to Christ is nurtured by leaders who love and promote Christ. Trust in God modeled by the leadership begets a growing faith in the hearts of the sheep. Where the elders are an example of humility, gentleness, and servanthood the flock of God flourishes in peace and safety. We must flee the seductive influence of power and praise by putting our hearts in check, forsaking any Diotrephes-like tendency, and returning once again to the servant-life. God’s people deserve the best of our stewardship.

Diotrephes is Back: Part Two

2006-03-07T04:34:00.000-08:00

Love of Praise

Diotrephes was a church leader of some notable rank, probably a senior pastor by today’s standards. For all his achievements in ministry he is described in scripture as an egocentric personality who “[loved] to be first among them” (3 John 9). He had an insatiable desire for preeminence. His heart secretly delighted in the praises of others which fed his exalted view of his own abilities. When a leader satisfies himself with the cheers of men he lays the groundwork for a host of ministry-disrupting behavior. For example, Diotrephes’ love for preeminence led to an unsubmissive heart toward church authority (v.9b). Furthermore, he became deceitful, “unjustly accusing …with wicked words” (v.10). The egocentric leader is intolerant and hyper-critical of others. Positioning himself for maximum attention he will readily dispense with another’s ministry gifts, talents, and ideas. Like Diotrephes, he will not tolerate anyone encroaching upon his territory. Such an appetite for man’s applause is the result of ingratitude for one’s gifts, and desiring personal significance outside of God’s will. The scriptures warn against “[searching] out one’s own glory” (Proverbs 25:27; 28:6-7). We can avoid the lure of man’s praise by remembering that our significance is found in becoming useful to Christ. Moreover, we are told in 1 Peter 4:10 that we have “received” spiritual gifts from God and are merely “stewards of [his] manifold grace”. Apart from Him we can accomplish nothing!

Human praise always tests the character of a leader (Proverbs 27:21) because it brings true motives to the surface. All of us at one time or another have received a word of thanks for a job well done or praise for personal qualities and talents. In fact, according to Proverbs 12:8, it is natural for a man to be “…praised for his insight”. There is even a place for publicly praising a faithful servant, as Paul does when referring to Epaphroditis in Philippians 2:29-30, “Therefore…hold men like him in high regard because he came close to death for the work of Christ…”. In ministry, however, striking a balance between humbly receiving a genuine compliment and seeking only the glory of Christ can be challenging. How can you know whether you love the praises of men? A few simple questions may help: Do you withhold praise from others? Do you delight in getting attention? Are you uncomfortable in the presence of gifted peers? Would others describe you as self-promoting? If you struggle to rejoice in the usefulness of others you have laid the seed-bed for cultivating a love of praise.

Diotrephes is Back: Part One

2006-03-02T10:23:00.000-08:00

Robert G. Lee was a shepherd whose ministry was marked by a love for his people and a determined defense for the word of God. It had been a simple but profound approach to his service in the church, and the result was a lifetime of usefulness and blessing. But how did such effectiveness come from such simplicity? The real secret lies in the lens through which Lee viewed his calling. Notice that his perspective was focused around two biblical commands which every church is called to obey. When a shepherd sees his labor as the highest act of submission to Christ he is most “useful to the Master, prepared for every good work” (2 Timothy 2:21). Unfortunately, such tireless dedication is becoming the exception rather than the rule as today’s generation of shepherds are easily seduced by the lure of public recognition, wealth, power, sensuality, and personal significance. The evangelical landscape has become a wasteland of shattered trust and scattered sheep, largely due to a crop of leaders who have traded their pastoral call for personal gain. The Apostle Peter exhorted the elders of the church to “…shepherd the flock of God…exercising oversight…according to the will of God” (1 Peter 5:2). Peter reminds us of the profound mandate given to every overseer, a task that demands sacrifice and careful stewardship. The sheep are not the possession of their leaders but rather their immense privilege. The call to pastoral faithfulness is grounded in the purposes of God for His people, requiring a full-range care that befits His design. The trustworthy pastor, then, will serve God best by feeding the sheep with His food, reproving them with His word, tending them with His heart, and disciplining them with His grace. There is no place in the ministry for personal gain or selfish ambition. Nor should the work of the church be used to nurture one’s own desire for significance. The Holy Spirit calls and gifts a man beyond his human abilities, confirming that in the end all ministry effectiveness points to God’s significance. A.W. Tozer has pointedly remarked that

“A true and safe leader is likely to be one who has no desire to lead, but is forced into a position of leadership by the inward pressure of the Holy Spirit and the press of the external situation. Such were Moses and David and the Old Testament prophets. I think there was hardly a great leader from Paul to the present day but was drafted by the Holy Spirit for the task, and commissioned by the Lord of the Church to fill a position he had little heart for. I believe it might be accepted as a fairly reliable rule of thumb that the man who is ambitious to lead is disqualified as a leader. The true leader will have no desire to lord it over God’s heritage, but will be humble, gentle, self-sacrificing and altogether as ready to follow as to lead, when the Spirit makes it clear that a wiser and more gifted man than himself has appeared."

While many leadership pitfalls line the road to a blessed ministry, there are two particularly dangerous weaknesses that can quickly ruin a leader and bring lasting heartache to any church. Sadly, both weaknesses are graphically portrayed in a man called Diotrephes, mentioned in Third John 9 and10. His ministry is the classic account of a leader for whom God’s people became a personal trophy. He had allowed his heart to drift into the treacherous waters of pride and conceit, seduced by the influence of personal power and human praise.

Preaching in the postmodern age

2006-02-26T22:49:00.000-08:00

David Wells is interviewed about his new book Above All Earthly Pow'rs. Concerning preaching in the postmodern age he states,

"The most important thing to know about preaching is that it arises legitimately only from God's Word, which is the resource of Truth given to the Church. In the West, the Church is living in a postmodern context in which there is no Truth, only ‘truths;’ no moral norms, only preferences; no Virtues, only values which we then go on to treat in a value-free way. Preaching, therefore, is the principal way by which God secures our cognitive and behavioral distance from our fallen culture while securing our identity with his moral character and his redemptive purposes. This is something quite different from what we expect to hear today from the plexiglass stands that have taken the place of pulpits in so many evangelical churches."

Looking foreword

2006-02-26T12:36:00.000-08:00

The week ahead looks to be rather busy and exciting for the contributors to Expository Thoughts. We will all be out in Los Angeles for various things. Some will be attending the Shepherd's Conference while others (me) will be stuck in more business type meetings. This does not mean that the blog will be silent; to the contrary. . .

This week marks the anniversary of Martyn Lloyd-Jones death and Chris Pixley will be leading the charge on a series of articles that reflect on the Doctor as a preacher and his influence in the evangelical world. Following that, Jerry Wragg has penned a timely reminder from the life of Diotrephes.

I need your help. I am writing a piece on ML-J as a pastor and can't find a particular quote that I was looking for. Somewhere in volume 2 of Iain Murray's biography is a statement about ML-J's shortsightedness with his deacons. I haven't been able to mine-out the quote since it's been about ten years since I last read the book. Any help would be appreciated. Blessings to all, especially in your study of God's Word.

Interview with Richard Phillips

2006-02-25T15:54:00.000-08:00

In a new interview Richard Phillips takes on "redemptive-historical" method of preaching. He states,

"I preach the text of the passage before me. The message of my sermon is determined by the message of the passage, and the points of my sermon are given to me by the text. If the passage offers promises, I offer promises. If it makes demands, I present the demands. If it rebukes sin, I rebuke sin. Properly speaking, “redemptive-historical” preaching means to understand every passage not only in its local context but also as it relates to Christ and his saving work. Just as it used to be said that “all roads lead to Rome,” I believe that all texts lead to Christ. But each text leads to Christ via its particular message, and I must not impose any one doctrinal perspective on every text. My main criticism of redemptive-historical preaching or “Christ-centered” preaching is that many take it to mean that every text teaches the doctrine of justification. Instead of preaching the text and connecting it organically to Christ’s saving work, too many preachers merely ignore the text and dole out the same presentation they always give. This impoverishes preaching and flattens out the rich, redemptive contours that the Bible actually contains. Another abuse of this approach is to select a pastoral issue or sin concern on which the sermon will focus in such a way as to ignore the context of the passage and the pastoral issue or sin concern on which the original author and the Holy Spirit are focused."

You can read the full interview here.

Length of Tenure

2006-02-20T11:41:00.000-08:00

(The following is not meant to be a detailed defense of the issue at hand but is offered as a push to more conversation in an area that has been largely neglected among pastors)

How long should a pastor stay at his ministry assignment? This is a question that I have spent a good amount of time thinking about. The reason is not that I’m considering a move (far from it) but that I am constantly asked by fellow pastors how long they should “hang-on” at their respective churches. Many brothers in ministry have cried on my shoulder because of weariness, burnout, and factional difficulties all of which have raised the potential for ending their tenures. I was reminded of this when I read the news report of a well-known pastor leaving his mega congregation for another very large congregation out of state. Throughout the press release this pastor never gave a concrete answer for this massive change. He talked about seeking signs from the Lord and the emotional turmoil that such a decision had caused him but he never once spoke of his decision making process in biblical or pastoral terms. So when should a pastor leave? Just how much abuse should a pastor “put-up” with before he decides to move? What if his congregation leaves him financially strung while another congregation offers a significant salary increase? What are congregational “deal-breakers” that make it impossible for his continuance? Are there legitimate reasons to leave one congregation for another when they are essentially equal in size, influence, and ministry opportunity? The questions abound and never cease multiplying.

First I should say that there is no cookie-cutter approach to answering these sorts of questions. I realize that there are significant challenges that many pastors face which makes objectivity in this area hard to discern. I do not portend to have all the answers to such specific questions. However, I want to put forward the general thesis that pastors who preach should aim for lengthy tenures in one local church. Many reasons could be offered from the pragmatic to the more doctrinal. However, I think that in order to be most effective, a preaching ministry will require elongated tenure so as to prove the nature of the call itself and to provide consistent ministry.

As to the nature of the call, there is an implicit demand on the time of the elder which necessitates a lengthy stay. I can’t help but see this in pastoral charges like those in 1 Peter 5 and 2 Timothy 4:1-2. The things that the pastor is called to be and do take time…lots of time! The common joke is that, “pastors work one hour a week.” While this is no doubt true for many hirelings throughout the land, not so with the man who has been called by God and gives himself to the ministry with complete integrity. The average tenure of a pastor in the US is three years. That’s despicable and horrific when we consider what it takes to effectively minister to God’s flock in the way that He has prescribed. I’m not suggesting that a pastor fill his schedule with programs from the denomination office or with the latest fad from the “experts”. To the contrary, I’m suggesting he immerse himself with the specifics that God has called him to in Scripture (e.g., study, preach/teach, counsel, lead/administrate, visit, pray, practice, etc.). It takes time to do these things and it takes even more time to do them with excellence. This means that every week will be full and when he enters his third year of ministry he’s not looking for an escape but he’s just getting started. We see leaders with this basic commitment as far back as Ezra who “set his heart to study the law of the LORD and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel” (Ezra 7:10). No doubt this was a great demand on Ezra’s time and it required sustained influence in and among Israel.

My thinking was challenged again on this issue from an unlikely source, the book of Hosea. In preparation for preaching through the book I was struck with the nature of Hosea’s call to ministry (Hos. 1:2) and how long it lasted (Hos.1:1). The best guesses tell us that Hosea’s ministry lasted around forty years. We could think of others like Jeremiah and Isaiah who also persevered through difficult ministries. I was struck by a comment on Hosea from the insightful pen of John Calvin. Here’s what he had to say on the length of Hosea’s ministry and it’s implications for pastoral practice:

“But when God employs our service for twenty or thirty years, we think it wearisome, especially when we have to contend with wicked men, and those who do not willingly undertake the yoke, but pertinaciously resist us; we then instantly desire to be set free, and wish to become like soldiers who have completed their time. When, therefore, we see that this Prophet persevered for so long a time, let him be to us an example of patience, so that we may not despond, though the Lord may not immediately free us from our burden” (Calvin’s Commentaries, Vol. 13, “Hosea” pg.38).

Calvin is essentially saying that when we enter our 20th or even 30th year we are just getting started!!! This is alarming when we consider again that the average stay is three years. Brothers, there is no “thou shall” or “shall not” when it comes to length of tenure in ministry. However, we are called to “take heed to the ministry” we have received so “that we may fulfill it” (cf. Col. 4:17; 2 Tim. 4:5) and to reciprocate that ministry to others called to the same task (2 Tim. 2:2). This will, in most cases, take a lot more than three years…it will take a lifetime. When we come to the end of our ministries, I pray we can join with the Apostle in like manner and say to our congregations, “I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable…I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:20, 24). The challenges are great but the Lord who called you is greater. The same Lord who called you to your ministry will strengthen you to weather the storms of that ministry. I close with a bit of wisdom from a seasoned pastor:

“Sometimes a pastor’s ministry to a particular church does come to an end and change is better for both, but the decision should be a joint one. The entire church leadership should be involved, and if that occurs, there should be no acrimony. It should be prayed over at length, explored in every detail, and handled in an open and aboveboard manner. Both parties should genuinely agree that this is the best plan for God’s Kingdom. When that is done, I believe we can expect God to bless those changes. But to continually hire and fire pastors, and for pastors to church-hop must be displeasing to the Lord and is very disruptive to the congregations” (Curtis Thomas, Practical Wisdom for Pastors, 144).

Preaching well known portions of Scripture

2006-02-13T10:34:00.000-08:00

While preparing a sermon on Jude 5 i came across a great quote by Pastor Matthew Henry. This comment reflects Jude's thought in a fresh way (Jude 1:5 "Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe").

Henry writes, "Preaching is not designed to teach us something new in every sermon, somewhat that we knew nothing of before; but to put us in remembrance, to call to mind things forgotten, to affect our passions, and engage and fix our resolutions, that our lives may be answerable to our faith. Though you know these things, yet you still need to know them better. There are many things which we have known which yet we have unhappily forgotten. Is it of no use or service to be put afresh in remembrance of them?"

Jude asks his audience to dig into their memory banks to recall some important lessons. Mature Christians do this very thing all the time. Most of the people at my current church have probably heard a sermon on just about every Scripture passage in the N.T. They know what I'm going to say before i say it.

May we remember this point and apply it to our ministries: Even mature Christians (yes pastors included) need to be reminded of the truths they know so well. Forgetfulness sometimes leads to non-application. All of us have memorized a passage in Holy Scripture only to find ourselves needing to re-memorize it a few years down the road (for some of us a few weeks down the road is more like it). It's part of our human fallibility. In some ways it keeps us dependent on the Holy Spirit and on the Holy Bible...

Jude begs his readers to apply the truth they know so well. Their knowledge is fully adequate. Thus, remember and apply these things.
Those of you, who like me, have grown up in the Church need to take this point to heart. You know the Scripture inside and out, but are you faithfully living them out? Are you applying what you know so well?

It's similar to the inspired words found in 2 Peter 1:12-14, Therefore, I shall always be ready to remind you of these things, even though you already know them, and have been established in b)the truth which is present with you. And I consider it right, as long as I am in this earthly dwelling, to stir you up by way of reminder, knowing that the laying aside of my earthly dwelling is imminent, as also our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me.

Review: The MacArthur Bible Commentary by John MacArthur

2006-02-12T20:51:00.000-08:00

“Unleashing God’s truth, one verse at a time” has been the motto of John MacArthur’s fruitful and enduring ministry of preaching. Out of the overflow of his pulpit ministry have come many books that have shaped and transformed the way believers think about the church, the gospel, and Christ. A milestone of this ministry came in 1997 with the publishing of The MacArthur Study Bible (hereafter, MSB). The MacArthur Bible Commentary (hereafter, MBC) seeks to build upon the foundational work of the MSB and greatly expands its usefulness for hungry Bible students.

This one-volume commentary stands in a long line of many other similar resources that have proved useful to Christians over the centuries. Making use of current scholarship and other reference resources this volume brings together a weight of helpful material and biblical insight. The MBC doubles the roughly 350 charts and diagrams of the MSB to almost 700 total. In addition the commentary material has been significantly revised and corrected in numerous places. Certain new features that did not appear in the MSB like “word-studies” and “further study” sections are new to this work. I believe it is a significant improvement over the MSB, especially for those who may not prefer NKJV that accompanies the MSB (although it has been rumored that the MSB will soon be wed to translations other than the NKJV).

Overview and strengths: The overall structure of the MBC is user-friendly. The outline of each Bible book not only appears at the beginning of each book but is integrated throughout the text of the commentary. In addition to the many new charts, word-studies, and diagrams a section called “Further Study” appears at the end of each book of the Bible. The “further study” section is a brief list of helpful commentaries generally of a non-technical expositional flavor. The “Overview of Theology” that formerly appeared at the end of the MSB is moved to the front matter of the MBC and renamed “Key Teachings of the Bible.”

Probably the most significant addition is the many abbreviated articles that appear throughout the commentary. These articles should prove to be of great practical help to the student, counselor, parent, or pastor. One will find in these articles brief but insightful counsel from the Word of God on such things as giving (p.1640), the will of God (p. 1761), hope (pp. 1958, 1628), love (pp. 1961, 1598, 1829), suffering (p.1920), and Bible study (pp. xx-xxiv). Even for the eschatologically curious one will find a brief discussion of the meaning of “666” (p.2020).

Theological nuances are not left out of the MBC. The theological persuasion found in its pages is decidedly credobaptist (see note on Acts 2:38); pretribulational (p.2006); and premillennial (see note on Rev. 20:2). One will also find helpful notes on particular redemption (see note on 1 John 2:2); unconditional individual election (see note on Eph. 1:11), and the relationship between Israel and the Church within a New Covenant context (see notes on Jeremiah 31:31-34). There are many theological avenues to explore in this grand volume.

Weaknesses: It is a tribute to MacArthur, the many fine editors, assistants, and professors who have labored long hours to see that the finished product is relatively clear of typos and publishing mistakes. In a work of this magnitude one can reasonably understand certain items being overlooked. However, a few things might not go unnoticed. In regards to quality, some of the pictures were inferior (p.1776) and the gray-scale in others appeared blurred (p. 921). Some typos appear to be formatting issues (e.g., the misplaced hyphen in “Corinth-ians’,” p.1613) and other simple spelling mistakes (“Hord” instead of “Word,” see comment on Ps. 19:1-14, p. 609). However, such mistakes appear so infrequently that one should not be bothered by their inclusion. The many strengths of this commentary far outweigh any weaknesses (whether perceived or real).

The MacArthur Bible Commentary should find wide usage within the body of Christ. Pastors, counselors, parents, and students will all benefit by the years of wisdom and Biblical insight that have accumulated and found residence within this single volume. I recommend it to all without hesitation and in hopes that believers will be rekindled in their passion for the study of God and His Word.

Don't abandon expository preaching: part 3

2006-02-12T20:40:00.000-08:00

This is the final installment from D. A. Carson’s “6 Reasons Not to Abandon Expository Preaching” from the Summer 1996 issue of Leadership Journal. Carson writes, “Other sermonic structures have their merits, but none offers our congregations more, week after week, than careful, faithful exposition of the Word of God.” Following are his final two points:

5. It forces the preacher to handle the tough questions.
6. It enables the preacher to expound systematically the whole counsel of God.

Don't abandon expository preaching: part 2

2006-02-10T08:09:00.000-08:00

We continue our series responding to D. A. Carson’s “6 Reasons Not to Abandon Expository Preaching” from the Summer 1996 issue of Leadership Journal. Quoting Carson, "Our aim as preachers is not to be the most erudite scholar of the age. Our aim is not to titillate and amuse. Our aim is not to build a big church. Our aim is to take the sacred text, explain what it means, tie it to other scriptures so people can see the whole a little better, and apply it to life so it bites and heals, instructs and edifies. What better way to accomplish this end than through expository preaching?"

His next three reasons:
2. It teaches people how to read their Bibles.
3. It gives confidence to the preacher and authorizes the sermon.
4. It meets the need for relevance without letting the clamor for relevance dictate the message.

Don't abandon expository preaching: part 1

2006-02-08T14:12:00.000-08:00

In the Summer 1996 issue of Leadership Journal, D. A. Carson offered a lucid and brief cry for true preaching. The name of the article was “6 Reasons Not to Abandon Expository Preaching.” The article, though short, is to the point and states the matter in a way that is characteristic of Carson’s writing style. I thought I would repeat his six points here over a few posts and then let everyone give their thoughts on the larger point. He writes, “Some use the category ‘expository preaching’ for all preaching that is faithful to Scripture. I distinguish expository preaching from topical preaching, textual preaching, and others, for the expository sermon must be controlled by a Scripture text or texts. Expository preaching emerges directly and demonstrably from a passage or passages of Scripture” (p. 87). His first reason to not abandon expository preaching is:

1. It is the method least likely to stray from Scripture.

So what do you think? Any thoughts, ideas, or input? I will post the other points after this one makes the rounds

A Lion and a Lamb

2006-02-07T18:27:00.000-08:00

Earlier today, I came across this glowing recommendation of one of my favorite preachers, Eric Alexander:

If there is anything better than hearing Eric Alexander preach, it is the privilege of praying with Eric. He has the gift, through deep reverence and long familiarity, of communicating the presence of the holy God. Eric also has the quality of being simultaneously a lion in the pulpit and a lamb outside of it -- a sure sign of the Holy Spirit's mighty working. It is always humbling to my spirit to be in Eric's presence. This is what God can do in a man's life over the course of decades, I tell myself. The writer of Hebrews was talking about men of God like Eric Alexander when he wrote, "Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith" (Heb. 13:7).

Would that such words could be spoken of all of us who stand behind the sacred desk! Indeed, that we would be men of prayer and the Word (Acts 6:4). That we would thunder from behind the pulpit with full-throated conviction the glories of our God and His truth. At the same time, that our lives among our people would be marked with a graciousness (born out of a deep personal experience of God's grace in our own lives) befitting the man who would be a shepherd. In so doing we will be reflecting none other than our precious Lord Jesus Christ, who was and is "full of grace and truth" (John 1:14).

(HT: Rick Phillips, Reformation21 blog)

Memorization Monday

2006-02-06T09:02:00.000-08:00

On Sunday evening I had the privilege of sharing the gospel with someone’s beloved grandmother who will depart this earth very soon. Her family is very concerned for her spiritual state because, though she has been gracious in her life, there is no indication that she has ever experienced the grace of God in salvation through Jesus Christ. I mention this because I felt once again the importance of Scripture memory because of a dumb mistake I made. As a rule I never visit someone in the hospital without my pocket NAS Bible. I have read from it many times at the bedside of children, the elderly and my own family. However Sunday night, in somewhat of a rush, I forgot it. The family graciously gave me an opportunity to minister to her and to speak with liberty about her soul and her desperate need of Christ. For a long while, all I had was the Scriptures tucked away in my pea-sized brain. The Lord was gracious and brought many lengthy passages to memory but it reminded me once again of the need to “hide away” the Scriptures in my life.

Hereafter, I will use Mondays to highlight a passage that I would recommend for memorization. I think longer passages are better than a verse here or there but you can do what works best for you. If your not convinced that Scripture memory is for you than I would recommend you read Psalm 119 to remind you of its crucial importance. For too long the people of God have gotten by on a paltry diet of therapeutic quips from man’s wisdom or trite truisms that have no eternal value. So redeem the time today by satiating your mind with the Word of the Lord. You may be called on when you least expect it.

Today I am working on memorizing Isaiah 53. Blessings to you.

Reading and Preachers (pt 2)

2006-02-03T05:53:00.000-08:00

Here is some free advice from a young pastor to any other young pastors. I hope some of this will help.

When I was younger I use to buy anything that was on sale (if it were theologically “solid” of course). This meant buying all of CBD’s super-sale items. Items like Spurgeon’s 5 volume preaching set for $25; Luther’s 7 volume works for $50; The Early Church Father’s 38 volume set for only $199; etc, etc.

For most of us, shelf space evidentially becomes an issue (sometimes a big issue). I have 6 very large built in bookshelves (in my pastoral office) and I am already running out of space. I realize now that just because something is “solid” and "cheap" doesn’t necessarily mean you should buy it. If you are not going to reference a set very often it may not be worth your shelf space. Fair?

Also remember that when you move (and many of us pastors move quite frequently), that books are heavy, expensive, and hard to move. The more books you have the more expensive your move will obviously cost (trust me I know).

Another lesson I learned along the way was to stop buying so many Christian inspirational/help books (for lack of a better word). Books like “the Pursuit of God,” “Knowledge of the Holy,” “the Puritan Paperbacks,” “101 Greatest Sermons,” most of John Piper’s books, Christian biographies, etc. are all great resources. These books help to keep the fire blazing but also require a lot of free reading time. Most Pastors I know have hundreds of books that they’ve never even read.

Some of those books were probably unnecessary purchases. Instead of buying every good C.J. Mahaney book that comes out why not read the ones on our shelves first?
Commentaries and other theological reference works are much better investments in my humble opinion. Even though you do not use every one, all the time, they are very helpful in the preparation of any expository sermon. I have invested the majority of my money in recent years on commentaries, theology sets/books, and certain key reference works (like TDONT). Many men are buying computer software sets to help offset the problem I mentioned above. I am more of a book guy but to each his own.

Setting aside money in the church budget to purchase key books for the church library is a good idea. Highlighting new books in the church bulletin is one of many ways to encourage your congregation to read more good Christian books. Many Christians spend more time reading blogs, Sports Illustrated, and fluffy Christian books (like “the Prayer of Jabez”) then they do reading anything of real value (let alone there bibles). Selecting good books for your church library is one way to help your congregation grow spiritually.

One more tidbit, as a new pastor be careful not to throw out all the old books in your “new” church library (not that I know this from experience). :) It will be very tempting to eliminate every Larry Crabb, James Dobson, Bruce Wilkinson, and Gary Ezzo item the moment you walk into your current churches library. Resist the urge! Some old timers bought those books with their last medicare checks, if you know what i mean? In time you will probably be able to get away with purging the old library with new (more biblical) books.

Take care,

Caleb

Piper on "post-modern" as "pre-modern"

2006-02-02T13:03:00.000-08:00

Justin Taylor reports from the Bethlehem Pastor's Conference here. Today John Piper said the following while speaking on William Tyndale. Thoughts anyone?

“It is ironic and sad that today supposedly avant-garde Christian writers can strike this cool, evasive, imprecise, artistic, superficially-reformist pose of Erasmus and call it “post-modern” and capture a generation of unwitting, historically naïve, emergent people who don’t know they are being duped by the same old verbal tactics used by the elitist humanist writers in past generations. We saw them last year in Athanasius’ day (the slippery Arians at Nicaea), and we see them now in Tyndale’s day. It’s not post-modern. It’s pre-modern—because it is perpetual.”

A place to start

2006-02-01T22:48:00.000-08:00

Chris, reading ideas seem to be the flavor of the month in the blog world (see Chris Pixley's post below). Nevertheless, these are really good questions, I will take a shot at a few of them. I hope you won’t mind my responding in a post since this is probably too long for a comment.

I know preachers always say this but our first love in reading should be the Scriptures. Too many times I have been able to rattle off a list of books I’m reading only to be far too deficient in the only book that really matters. I have truly made a conscious effort to increase my Bible intake with the goal of reading through Scripture about three times a year. The other change came when I read a few books by Hughes Oliphant Old on worship and prayer (I have come to cherish anything he has in print…much on preaching too). Learning to constantly ask the Lord to “open my eyes that I may behold wonderful things form His law” has meant everything in my study. Along these lines, Matthew Henry’s “A Method of Prayer” was huge in transforming my prayer practice, especially as it relates to ministry of the Word.

Outside of Scripture I’m reading T. H. L. Parker’s “Calvin’s Preaching.” I’m also making my way through LOTR and Augustine’s “Confessions.” In the way of periodicals and journals, I subscribe to The Master’s Seminary Journal, The Journal of Modern Ministry, Reformed Quarterly, Time Magazine, ESPN, U. S. News and World Report, World, Forbes, The Week, and National Review.

Building an effective ministry library is like owning Google stock, it’s expensive and you can never have too much of it. As a “general rule” I only purchase commentaries and resources on whatever I’m teaching at the moment. Yes there are always exceptions but this is where I try to focus my attention and budget. In preparing for sermons, the books I turn to most are TDNT, BAGD, TWOT, ISBE and whatever commentaries I can find on the particular study. At the moment that means a lot resources on the Sermon on the Mount and the Minor Prophets.

On Reading and Preachers

2006-02-01T07:21:00.000-08:00

There's a great discussion going on over at the Together for the Gospel blog regarding the importance of reading in the lives of that blog's contributors. It got me thinking about my own reading habits and how much good Christian literature has influenced my own Christian life and ministry. In that vein, I've a few questions for the contributors of this fair blog:

1. C.J. Mahaney asserts, "I have yet to meet a leader who is growing in personal passion for God and godliness, and effectiveness in pastoral ministry and preaching, who doesn't have a voracious appetite for reading." Do you men find your own experience agreeing with this observation? Is there a vital link between the success and effectiveness of one's pulpit ministry and his reading appetite? If so, in exactly what way does such a heavy reading diet impact our sermons?

2. Tell us about your own reading habits: Favorite authors/works, your reading schedule, etc. How do you find time to juggle your extra-textual reading with an already busy preaching, shepherding, administrating schedule?

3. Can you suggest any helpful strategies for effective reading that will supplement pastoral ministry? What kinds of things ought pastors to be reading in addition to their normal intake of textually related materials (the Bible, commentaries, grammars, other exegetical works, etc.)? What about material that is not distinctively Christian?

4. Do periodicals play any role in your regular reading? If so, which ones do you recommend and why?

5. Tell us about your library. What encouragement can you give to the young pastor about how to plan and build an effective ministry library?

6. Is it important to you to cultivate in your congregation a healthy appetite for reading good Christian books? If so, how do you go about accomplishing that goal?

We eagerly await your feedback!

P.S. The library photo above was borrowed from Paul Lamey's post from yesterday (1/31/06) at Lameworldview , marking the 114th anniversary of the death of the great "Prince of Preachers", Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

"plain style" preaching is like asthma

2006-01-26T14:15:00.000-08:00

The worst critic of my preaching is me. I know I share this with many of my fellow expositors. How many times have we walked away from the pulpit thinking there were a thousand better ways to communicate what was just said. However someone may retort, "Yes Paul, but the Spirit will use your words no matter how mangled they flow." I would be the first to admit this is true but it does not alleviate our responsibility to communicate clearly and plainly. I suspect one source of this problem is the tendency to play the scholar in the pulpit (some show it outside the pulpit as well not the least of which is in the blog world). The problem appears that some have confused what it means to be a preaching scholar. The late James Boice writing in the chapter "The Preacher and Scholarship" in The Preacher and Preaching (ed. Samuel T. Logan, 1986) notes,

"Still, it is not the scholarship we are preaching. Still less must we preach ourselves, as if the scholarly element in sermons could be used to gain prestige for the preacher. We are to preach the Word of God, knowing that only the Word contains within it the power necessary to break sin's shackles and turn a rebellious child of Adam back from the life of sin to the Savior. The minister, even in being quite technical, should never forget that his end is not chiefly to inform in such areas, but to comfort his listeners with the need to hear and obey the Word of God. . . .if it [scholarship] takes the place of God's Word, it is worse than useless" (p.104).

Dr. Sinclair Ferguson has also issued a reminder that the "plain style" of preaching is what expositors should aim for. He writes,"There are many ways this principle applies. Do not make eloquence the thing for which you are best known as a preacher; make sure you get the point of the passage you are preaching, and that you make it clear and express its power. True evangelical eloquence will take care of itself. " Ferguson also notes that Anglican J. C. Ryle spoke often of this great need, "Have a clear knowledge of what you want to say. Use simple words. Employ a simple sentence structure. Preach as though you had asthma! Be direct. Make sure you illustrate what you are talking about."

You can see Dr. Ferguson's full article here.

Kaiser at pastor forum on the OT

2006-01-26T12:19:00.000-08:00

If you're in the Jacksonville, FL area you may be interested in this pastor's forum on the "Christian and the 'Old' Testament" to be delivered by Walter Kaiser.