Archive for April, 2009

Leadership Law of E. F. Hutton, # 5 (Part Two)

Posted: April 30, 2009 in Leadership
Tags: , ,
0

The  Leadership Law of E. F. Hutton says, “When the real leader speaks, people listen.” In part one we discovered that your level of confidence and character send a message.

Your level of Competence sends a message.

Kouzes and Posner said that “the fourth most admired leadership attribute is competence” (page 17). About Christ the preacher, it was said, “Never man spoke like this man” (John 7:46). 

Develop your preaching competency. We not only need character, but competency. Suppose you have a brain tumor and there are two possible surgeons. You interview the first. He has a big black Bible on his desk. He gives you his testimony and has prayer with you. You ask him, “Doc, what is the percentage of patients who are living one year after you perform brain surgery. He answers, “85 % of the patience that I perform surgery on who have a tumor like your tumor is living one year later.” You interview the second brain surgeon. He has no Bible. He is an atheist. You ask him the same question. He answers, “99.9%.” Which do you ask? It is obvious to me. I ask the first doctor to come to the OR, stand in the corner and pray while the second performs the brain surgery. But doctors also need character. What if you only needed therapy and the doctor prescribed surgery for the money? Both character and competency are necessary for effectiveness therefore continue to sharpen your homiletical skills.

Your level of Charisma sends a message.

Maxwell defines charisma as “the ability to bring a sparkle into the room. Charisma is faith, positive attitude and confidence. Charisma is what draws people to you and makes the medicine go down easy.”

The basic ingredients of charisma are a positive attitude that says with Paul “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13). An encouraging disposition like Barnabas, the son of encouragement. His real name was Joses (Acts 4:36), but his friends nicknamed him “son of encouragement.” What would our friends nickname you and me? Other ingredients of charisma are a good sense of humor (Proverbs 15:13, 15); ability to remember people’s names (John 1:42); and a focus on the other person’s needs rather than yours (Philippians 2:4). Also, giving others the credit instead taking credit for ministries or tasks accomplished. There are three kinds of material in the book of Nehemiah: Narrative, prayers, and lists of names. Lists of names is greatest part of material in Nehemiah because he was always giving recognition to others.

Your level of Care sends a message .

Maxwell says that “85% of leadership is relationships.” Maxwell also quotes Theodore Roosevelt, “The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people.”

Kouzes and Posner entitled chapter three “Leadership is a Relationship” in Credibility. The opening line is “Leadership is a reciprocal relationship between those who choose to lead and those who decide to follow.” Their first example is Gayle Hamilton vision manager of the Coast Division for the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, who told Kouzes and Posner, “I have a strong willingness to be a part of what is going on, rather than apart from. I don’t think people enjoy working for long stretches for someone who won’t be part of what’s happening.” That morning, Hamilton, was at work by 5:30 A.M. along with her division council, to celebrate the first time that performance recognition checks had ever been distributed to bargaining-unit employees. Hamilton and her leaders were preparing the celebration breakfast for their 300 employees. They did the decorating, setting up, cooking, serving, and cleaning up. Kouzes and Posner concluded, “That breakfast was in many ways a microcosm of a new approach to leadership, one characterized by serving others rather than being served, based on giving rather than receiving” (page 3).

When I read that example of the new model of leadership, I thought of Jesus serving His disciples breakfast after they had fished all night and caught nothing (John 21:9-13). Jesus even said, “I came not to be served, but to serve and to give my life a ransom for many.”

If we love God with all our heart and others as ourselves, as Jesus said were the two greatest commandments, we will possess all these ingredients to impact others with our words.

 

 

Leadership Law of Empowerment: Law # 12

Posted: April 29, 2009 in Leadership
Tags: , , , ,
0

Stephen Covey emphasizes two kinds of delegation. The first is gofer delegation which emphasizes the methods. The Gofer’s Creed is “Just tell me what you want me to do and I will do it.” The second and better kind of delegation is stewardship delegation which emphasizes the results. Stewardship delegation is the delegation of responsibilities or ministries that the person has been equipped to accomplish; not menial errands. Covey’s stewardship delegation is closer to Maxwell’s empowerment.

 

Maxwell, however, sees a difference between delegation and empowerment. An example of delegation would have been Paul on the first missionary journey immediately after leading Timothy to Christ, Paul would have sent Timothy to a church like Ephesus. Empowerment is what Paul actually did. Paul instructed first Timothy, modeled what he wanted Timothy to be and do (Acts 16), gave Timothy some experience and accountability (Acts 18:5). Then Paul sent Timothy, having empowered him, to his greatest assignment with the authority to be the pastor (1 Tim. 1:1-3).

 

Insecure leaders do not empower. Secure leaders surround themselves with the best and the brightest people and are not jealous or threatened. Maxwell writes about the Henry Fords (Senior and the Second) who did not empower their leaders but underminded them to the detriment of The Ford Motor Company. Maxwell writes, “Any time an executive gained power and influence, Henry Ford II would undercut the person’s authority by either moving him into a position with less clout, supporting the executive’s subordinates, or publicly humiliating him. This continued all the days Henry II was at Ford.” The Fords did not practice the leadership law of empowerment which says that only secure leaders give power to others.

 

Another reason leaders do not empower and give responsibility and authority to others is the co-dependency of the leader on his followers. The leader should be a launching pad for those he is training. But if the leader is co-dependent, the leader is a leaning post. When you need people you cannot lead them. If you need people’s approval you will never make the tough decisions.

 

Maxwell teaches us how to empower others.

                               

First, you must trust your people with responsibility.

 

If you want them to grow you must let them go. Was Jesus threatened when He knew His disciples would accomplish more that He would as far as man hours and ministries opportunities as He predicted in John 14:12? No! That is exactly why Jesus poured three years of His life into them. This also means that we must let those we are empowering make mistakes and then learn those valuable lessons that only mistakes teach.

 

Also, you must train them for competency.

 

When we and our leaders stop growing so will our ministries. This means we must budget money for specific training in their areas of ministry. This money can be spent on books, periodicals, seminars, or master level courses. This line item in the budget sends a message to the entire church about how serious this church takes leadership training.

 

Next, you must unleash them with authority.

 

How did Jesus train? He first instructed His disciples (Matthew 10:1-42). He showed them how ministry is done (Matthew 11:1). Jesus then sent His disciple out for field experience (Luke 10:1). He also gave them authority that was equal to the responsibility (Luke 10:9). Finally, Jesus held them accountable (Luke 10:17).

 

You must monitor your people through accountability.

 

Jesus held His disciples accountable for their ministries (Luke 10:17). Accountability is not following our people around like a highway patrolman tailing us. Accountability is planned follow-up where they know they will report on the progress of the project or the ministry.

 

Lastly, you must care about them and believe in them for maximum potential.

 

The leader cares enough for his people that he believes in them and wants them to succeed. How do you know if you are an empowering leader? The moment you experience more joy in the success of others than in your own success.

Leadership Law of E. F. Hutton: Law #5 (Part One)

Posted: April 28, 2009 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
0

The Law of E. F. Hutton says, “When the real leader speaks, people listen.” If you want to get something started in your organization to whom do you go? That person is the E. F. Hutton or the real leader. Or, if you want to get something stopped in your organization to whom do you go? That person is the actual mover and shaker whether he or she has the title or not. For example, Nehemiah knew Artaxerxes was the man of influence in his life and work. Nehemiah wisely built a relationship with him and showed him respect. Consequently, Nehemiah was able to influence his E. F. Hutton to grant him permission to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem and accomplish God’s will. Maxwell says if you want to know who the leader is in your meeting, follow the eyes of the group to identify the E. F. Hutton.

 

How can I be the E. F. Hutton that people listen to when I speak? How can I influence through my communication? Realize first, Maxwell says, you are the message. If people do not respect the messenger, they will not listen to his message. Listen to the reason Paul gave for the effectiveness of his preaching to the Thessalonians: “For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in  much assurance; as you know what manner of men we were among you for your sake” (1 Thessalonians 1:5). Because they respected Paul they responded to his words. Maxwell gives the following practical suggestions for the Law of E. F. Hutton to be lived out.

 

Your level of Confidence sends a message.

 

Confidence comes from preparation. The writer of Ecclesiastes wisely said, “If the iron be blunt, and he does not whet the edge, then must he put to more strength: but wisdom is profitable to direct” (Ecclesiastes 10:10). Abraham Lincoln once admitted: “If I had only eight hours to cut down a tree, I would spend two hours sharpening my axe.” Time spent in preparation is not wasted time. Your confidence ultimately comes from the Lord who called you and His Word. Again listen to Paul describe why God used him at Thessalonica: “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when you received the word of God which you heard of us, you received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also in you that believe” (1 Thessalonians 2:13). Confidence also comes from experience. So prepare well for each message and keep at it.

 

Your level of Character sends a message.

 

Aristotle, in the first book on public speech entitled Rhetoric, stressed the importance of character or ethos in persuasion. Augustine, who wrote the first book on Homiletics, Concerning Christian Doctrine, likewise emphasized the importance of the preacher’s character if his ecclesiastical rhetoric was to persuade. Spurgeon in his Lectures to my Students” wrote a chapter entitled, “Take heed to thyself.”  The same is true in the secular businesses. Leadership authors, Kouzes and Posner in their book Credibility give the result of 25 years of extensive leadership surveys. They write “No matter where we have conducted our studies—regardless of country, geographical region, or type of organization—the most important leadership attribute since we began our research in 1981 has always been honesty” (pages 14-15).

 

Paul writing to a young leader advised: “Let no man despise your youth; but be an example of the believers in word, manner of living, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity…Take heed unto yourself, and unto doctrine; continue in them, for in so doing this you will both save yourself, and them that hear you” (1 Timothy 4:12-16).

 

 

Leadership Law of the Lid: Law # 1

Posted: April 27, 2009 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

“The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” by John Maxwell is a great book to read to increase your leadership or influence on others and your culture. There is an audio and video series that can be listened to and watched as you read through each chapter. The book, audio and video series will give three perspectives on the same leadership law. Maxwell suggests that you take one chapter a month for 21 months and focus on one leadership principle. During that month you will assess your leadership, apply the leadership principle, and take one action assignment. All three areas are laid out in the work book. In 21 months, you will have grown as a leader.

 

When I pastored Swan Creek Baptist Church, I took our staff through the book in 21 months. One of our weekly staff meetings each month was devoted to studying a law of leadership. In order to grow leaders (2 Tim. 2:1, 2) we must grow as leaders. “The best thing leaders can do for their organization is to grow personally” (Henry Blackaby, Spiritual Leadership, p. 31). I want to review the 21 irrefutable laws in the following posts.

 

The first irrefutable law of leadership is The Law of the Lid: Leadership Ability Determines a Person’s Level of Effectiveness. The lid on your leadership must be raised to increase your leadership ability and influence. One of the ways to raise the lid blocking your leadership is to develop a leadership bias instead of a manager bias. Through a series of contrasts, Maxwell shows the difference between management and leadership.

 

Leaders focus more on dreaming the vision of the future like Joseph (Gen. 37)

Managers analyze the details of today

 

Leaders spend more time looking for opportunities

Managers smooth out current situations

 

Leaders focus more on people like Barnabas the encourager (Acts 4:36; 9:27; 11:26; 15:37)

Managers focus on accomplishing tasks

 

Leaders prefer high risks environments

Managers prefer safety zones

 

Leaders have a bias toward creativity, fluidity, and innovation

Managers have a bias toward preservation, protection, and procedure

 

In addition to focusing on leadership instead of management, the leader who wants to grow as a leader can identify lid blockers. What are the destructive weaknesses or major flaws in your character or competency that is hindering your spiritual and professional development? These must be conquered with God’s help. Maybe the lib blocker is anger. Then for one month memorize and mediate on verses like Proverbs 16:32: “He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty: and he that rules his spirit than he that takes a city.” One of the greatest hinderances to leading people is a lack of credibility. Lid blockers kill credibility.

 

Credibility is so important that leadership authors James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner wrote a book entitled Credibility. The opening line states: “Credibility is about how leaders earn the trust and confidence of their constituents.” Kouzes and Posner for two decades have been asking people the same question: “What do you look for and admire in a leader, someone whose direction you would willingly follow?” Amazingly, for two decades, Kouzes and Posner have received the same answer: “Leaders who are honest, forward-looking, competent, and inspiring” (James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner. Credibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass 2003, xiii). Notice first on the list is a character quality. When we remove the spiritual and moral lib blockers in our lives, God can grow us as leaders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Importance of Doctrinal Statements, Part Two

Posted: April 25, 2009 in Doctrinal Statements, Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
9

0128xA church member once said to me, “Catholics are Christians.” I tried to explain the difference between what the Catholic Church and the Bible teaches about salvation. I explained that while it is possible for a Catholic to be a believer it is not possible for a Catholic to be a believer and adhere to what the Catholic Church teaches about salvation.

Then I read Wayne Grudem in his popular Systematic Theology who quotes a Catholic theologian as representative of “the traditional Roman Catholic understanding of justification.” The Catholic theologian is Ludwig Ott, who wrote in 1960, “According to the teaching of the Council of Trent, justification is ‘sanctifying and renewing of the inner man.’” This quote is from Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma on page 257 and of course confuses justification and sanctification.

Grudem disagrees with the Roman Catholic view quoted from Ott, but then Grudem makes a follow-up comment about which I have questions: “It should be noted that Ott represents more traditional, pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism, and that many contemporary Roman Catholics have sought an understanding of justification that is closer to a Protestant view” (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, p. 727). My question is, on what basis does Grudem say that contemporary Roman Catholics are closer to the Protestant view of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone? Has there been a recent RCC council that has rewritten the RCC doctrine found in the Council of Trent of 1560s? Has there been a Papal decree that documents Catholicism’s move to the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone? (For an excellent defense of the reformation’s sola fide or doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone see R.C. Sproul’s Faith Alone.)

The Council of Trent of the 1560s

The Roman Catholic Church’s doctrinal statement was written clearly at the Council of Trent (1545-63) and has not changed. The following is Canon 24 from the Council of Trent (The RCC’s doctrinal statement): 

“If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to the obtaining of the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema” (Canon 9 of the Council of Trent, see also Canon 14).

The Vatican II of the 1960s

The Vatican Council, Second, 1962-65, the 21st ecumenical council which was attended by 2,400 Catholic bishops did not change the Roman Catholic Council of Trent’s view on works for salvation:

For it is the liturgy through which, especially in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, ‘the work of our redemption is accomplished,’ and it is through the liturgy, especially, that the faithful are enabled to express in their lives and manifest to others the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Introduction, para.2).

“Thus by Baptism men are grafted into the paschal mystery of Christ. . . . They receive the adoption as sons” (Vatican II, Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy, Chapter I, para. 6).

At Mark Driscoll’s website Resurgence, pastor Justin Holcomb posts a very dangerous evaluation of the Second Vatican Council.

Here is one of the favorable comments by Holcomb concerning the Second Vatican Council:

The Council also sought to foster dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and other faiths and Christian denominations. In fact, the Council stated in regard to Eastern faiths, “the Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions.” Yet, the Council still held to the fact that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6).

“Protestants can glean wisdom from some of the formulations of the Second Vatican Council. Perhaps most importantly, we can look to the Council’s urging for us to be the church to the world in a relevant and faithful way. This is an affirmation that emphasizes an understanding of the gospel expressed in evangelism and in loving action to the world. So, while there may be elements of Vatican II with which we disagree, there is also that plenty we would affirm.” Holcomb says “there may be elements of Vatican II with which we disagree.” Does he not disagree with Vatican II’s baptismal regeneration? Paul had a very severe view of works for salvation as expressed in Galatians 1:6-9.

Justin Holcomb also presents a very weak summary of the Council of Trent. He seeks to find common ground with this RCC anathema of justification by faith alone rather than exposing this document as false teaching.

The new Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992

The Roman Catholic Church’s doctrinal position on salvation has not changed since The Vatican Council II in the mid-sixties as the new Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992 declared: “The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us ‘the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ’ and through Baptism” article 1987.

The Evangelical Catholics

Evangelical Catholics, like Keith A. Fournier, claim to be Christians who in their thinking is not in contradiction with Catholic tradition and theology. In his book Evangelical Catholics, Fournier writes, “Many Christians misunderstand the Catholic theology of salvation as one of salvation by good works. . . . this view does not represent Catholic theology.” But, then Fournier writes approvingly of the Vatican II: “In their marvelous document entitled the ‘Decree on Ecumenism,’ the Bishops of the Catholic Church show the respect which must properly be afforded to all Christians: ‘. . . All those justified by faith through baptism are incorporated into Christ’” (Keith A. Fournier, Evangelical Catholics, Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990, pages 16, 96).

This statement from the Catholic Church clearly teaches salvation by good works and Evangelical Catholic Fournier agrees. You can go to www.evangelicalcatholic.com and read how contemporary Evangelical Catholics speak glowingly about the Vatican II and also state that a believer can be “fully Catholic and fully evangelical.” This is impossible when the RCC teaches salvation by works and conservative evangelicalism teaches salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. It is true that evangelicalism is very board today and includes works righteousness so I must qualify what I mean by evangelicalism.

The problem is that Evangelical Catholics use the vocabulary of Scripture but a different dictionary. This makes it difficult for undiscerning believers to know the difference and thus allow them to think that “Catholics are Christians.” I have dear friends who are Catholics. You cannot judge a church, denomination, or movement by the personalities in it but by the beliefs adhered to in their doctrinal statements.

How is the Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine of Justification by Works gotten closer to the Biblical doctrine of Justification by Grace alone through Faith alone in Christ alone according to Grudem?

I hope this brief survey of Catholic doctrinal statements will help us answer church members who have questions concerning Catholicism and witness to the unsaved who may be confused about the biblical truth of justification by faith alone.

“What is the Gospel?” Part Last

Posted: April 24, 2009 in Salvation
Tags: , , , ,
0

The “Crossless Free Gracers” not only believe the gospel can be found in a single evangelistic verse but they also contend that the “Legalistic Free Gracers” cannot agree on how many items are in the gospel that must be believed. “Biblically, the good news (the gospel) addresses different truths concerning Jesus. First Corinthians 15 address eight items and, I guess, Luke 2:10-11 could be used to support a position that His birthplace of Bethlehem is part of the gospel…. As a result, the necessity of picking and choosing the four or five or six items from some ten or more as absolute essential requirements for salvation causes one to pose and ponder—“Which ones?” (Ken Neff, “What Is The Free Gospel?” Grace in Focus, March/April 2009, 4).

 

Neff continues in the article to mention the different “Legalistic Free Gracers” contradictory lists of necessary items for salvation. For example, Greg Schliesmann believes there are four necessary truths about Christ that must be received by the sinner: Christ’s deity, Christ’s Death and Resurrection, Gift by faith alone, Christ’s incarnation. Tom Stegall has a list of five essentials which include in addition to Schliesmann’s list, the humanity of Christ. Jonathan Perreault has six essentials.

 

Are there eight items in the gospel according to 1 Corinthians 15:1-8? No! The eight items discussed by Paul are the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ and Christ’s appearances to Cephas, the twelve, the five hundred, James, and Paul. The two essentials in this passage are the death of Christ and resurrection of Christ. The burial was proof of Christ’s death and the appearances were evidence of His resurrection. The gospel in 1 Corinthians 15 is essentially the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ the Son of God.

 

Zane Hodges argues that “one could believe all eight of the truths listed above and not yet be born again. Believing all these truths is not the same as believing Jesus for eternal life” (Zane Hodges, “Hydra” Grace in Focus, September/October 2008). The same could be said about believing in the name of Jesus for eternal life. “Crossless Free Gracer,” Robert N. Wilkin has his own list of essentials in the gospel: “We, too, must share those three elements. They are: 1. believing 2. in Jesus 3. for eternal life. I like to put it together in one sentence as follows: Jesus guarantees everlasting life to all who simply believe in Him” (Robert N. Wilkin, “Secure and Sure. Irving,TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2005, 74-75). A sinner equally could believe all three of Wilkin’s essentials and still not be saved. Saving faith requires knowledge of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Son of God, mental assent and trust in the person and work of Christ. The “Crossless Free Gracers” say requiring the sinner to believe more than is necessary is legalism. I quess Paul was a “Legalistic Free Gracer” in Romans 10:9 for requiring faith in the Son of God who was crucified and resurrected when he wrote, “If you shall confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord (i.e., God) and shall believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.”

The Importance of Doctrinal Statements, Part One

Posted: April 24, 2009 in Doctrinal Statements, Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
8

creedIn the next several posts, I want to grapple with what is necessary for the preservation of a local church or any Christian institution  i.e. , adhering to a Biblical doctrinal statement. I will eventually discuss Fuller Theological Seminary which slowly abandoned its doctrinal statement and also slowly moved to its present theologically liberal state.  Possessing a Biblical doctrinal statement is only one necessary step to preserving a local church or Christian institution. If the solid doctrinal statement is not adhered to, it is a worthless piece of paper. I would like to survey the inspiring and disappointing history of doctrinal statements and creeds to substantiate my thesis.

Driscoll has a good overview of the major creeds entitled The Concise History of Creeds and Confessions.

The First Two Great Church Councils

The two great ecumenical councils of the fourth century were The Council of Nicaea (325) and The Council of Constantinople (381). The first great controversy that patristic preachers faced was Arianism. Arius was a presbyter in Alexandria who believed in subordinationalism or the denial of the eternal generation of the Son of God. This view contends that the three persons of the Trinity are not of the same essence. Arius believed that the Son was “begotten” of the Father, that is, made or created or as Arius phrased his belief, “there was when he was not.” Because Christ was God’s first creation, the Son was not of the same essence of the Father, Arius advocated. Arius was actually a forerunner of Jehovah Witnesses.

Bishop Alexander of Alexandria fiercely disagreed. Constantine convened the first ecumenical council on June 19, 325 to resolve the conflict in Nicaea in Bithynia. Prior to the council, Arius had the backing of the church’s first historian, Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, who had been excommunicated earlier by a synod at Antioch because of his Arian sympathies. At the Council of Nicaea, however, Eusebius introduced a doctrinal statement that he helped forge that included the word homoousios which declared the Son to be of the same essence as the Father and was accepted by Constantine and the Council. The Nicene Creed was the product of the church’s first council and defended the deity of the Son of God. The Nicene Creed or, more properly, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, because of the influence of the Council of Constantinople in 381, reads as follows:

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all that is unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures: he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

The Impact of Athanasius

One pastor in particular battled Arianism. Athanasius almost singlehandedly battled for the truth of the Trinity in the fourth century and was exiled five times for 17 years for his relentless stand. Largely because of the influence of Athanasius the Council Nicaea met in 325 A.D. with 318 Christian leaders and declared Jesus “of one substance with the Father.” We should not take doctrinal truth for granted but teach and preach doctrine no matter what the outcome.

Read Justin Holcomb on The Nicene Creed.

Does your church have a doctrinal statement? Do you know the content of the doctrinal statement of your church? Do you agree with the doctrinal statement of your church? Do new members have to read and agree to the doctrinal statement of your church?

Leadership: The Law of Legacy

Posted: April 22, 2009 in Leadership
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

John F. Kennedy was right when he said, “It is time for a new generation of leadership.” That thought provokes a debate concerning leadership: Are leaders born or are leaders developed. Max Depree wrote, “Leadership is Art,” i.e., leadership can be learned. Jesus commanded, “Make disciples” in the Great Commission. Making disciples means making followers of Christ who will produce leaders for Christ. Are leaders born or are leaders developed? The answer is “yes.” Some individuals are born with leadership ability which still must be developed. But, leadership can be learned by every person who has a desire to impact his or her culture.

 

John Maxwell’s now famous definition of leadership is “Leadership is influence, nothing more, nothing less.” The greatest spiritual leader in my formative years was my Christian mother. She does not have a college education. She has never held a powerful corporate position. She has never received political awards. But she read God’s Word to my brothers and me nearly every night, prayed with us and took us to church three times a week. She was light and salt. She influenced me to Christ.

 

If Maxwell’s definition is true then leadership can be developed. As Maxwell says, “If you are a 6 on the leadership scale of 1 to 10, you can become an 8.” If we are going to be light and salt then we must develop as leaders and develop others as leaders. If you work in Sunday School, you are a leader developing leaders. If you listen to verses from clubbers in AWANA, you are a leader developing leaders. If you sponser a youth group, you are a leader developing leaders. If you are a Christian, you are a leader in your classroom or at your work site developing leaders. You are a leader with influence.

 

There is a difference between a leader and a great leader

 

Henry Blackaby said, “Leaders lead followers. Great leaders lead leaders.” That means, great leaders leave a legacy of leaders. Peter Drucker in The Effective Executive challenged, “There is no success without a successor.”  After I surrendered to the Lord and to the call to preach my first opportunity to serve in my local church was as teacher of Junior High Boys. I helped each boy teach a Sunday School lesson. The boys ministered to shut-ins and alcoholics in an Alcoholic Home. Several of the boys trusted Christ as Savior. One is a pastor and others are faithfully serving the Lord in local churches.

There are Biblical examples of the Law of Legacy. Joshua succeeded and exceeded Moses. Elisha succeeded and exceeded Elijah. The Twelve disciples succeeded Christ and exceeded Christ according to Jesus own words in John 14:12.

 

Samuel was a leader. But Samuel was not a great leader (1 Sam. 8:1) because Samuel led followers. Samuel left no successor. The Christian life is not a 100 yard dash but a Relay Race where the baton is handed off to another. To whom will you pass the baton of leadership?

 

Let’s look at one leader who left a legacy of leadership. God deposited truth with Paul (1 Tim. 1:11; Luke 12:48) at Paul’s conversion. Paul invested that deposit of truth with Timothy (1 Tim.1:18). How? He won Timothy to Christ in Acts 14. He invested time and energy into Timothy’s spiritual growth (Acts 16:1-3). Timothy was then to deposit the same truth to other leaders (2 Tim. 2:1, 2). Timothy is now pastor at the church of Ephesus when Paul writes 2 Timothy.

Timothy is a 2nd generation leader who is depositing the truth in a 3rd generation of leaders. Those leaders, the 3rd generation, were to deposit the truth into the next generation, the 4th generation (2 Tim. 2:2b). In whom are you depositing the truth of God’s Word?

Only leaders produce leaders

 

David produced leaders (giant killers) because he was a giant killer (2 Sam. 21:1-22). Saul did not produce leaders (giant killers) because he killed no giants. What are some practical ways we can grow as leaders and  produce leaders?

 

1. Never do ministry alone (Acts 13:2).

2. Create a leadership atmosphere or culture through seminars and preaching on leadership.

3. Train leaders through training sessions. Take your leaders or potential leaders through a book on leadership like Maxwell’s 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership or Henry Blackaby’s Spiritual Leadership.

4. Expose your people and family to leaders.

5. Associate with leaders yourself (boards, fellowships, etc). Les Olila wisely said there should be three kinds of people in our lives. We need a mentor or a Paul who is stretching us spiritually. We need a disciple or a Timothy whom we are mentoring. We also need a partner or a Barnabas who is encouraging us. Our Barnabas is not a mentor or disciple, just a friend.

6. Study leadership and read about leaders such as “Walking with the Giants” by Warren Wiersbe.

7. Watch leaders and learn from them.

8. Lead! The question is not, “What will be my legacy?” But, “Who will be my legacy?” Your lasting value as a leader will be measured by your successor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Noncontroversial Topic of Church Music, Part Two

Posted: April 21, 2009 in "Reader's Favorites", Church Ministries, Music, Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

Mark Driscoll passionately believes the church must impact culture, and rightly so. “To be in reformission, we must embed ourselves in a culture and develop friendships with lost people so that we can be informed and avoid making erroneous judgments…. As a missionary, you will need to watch television shows and movies, listen to music, read books, peruse magazines, attend events, join organizations, surf websites, and befriend people that you might not like to better understand people that Jesus loves” (Mark Driscoll, The Radical Reformission, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004, pages 97, 103).

The issue is how deeply do we embed in culture to get educated to reach the lost. This philosophy will affect our styles of music. There are basically three styles of music according to Driscoll: high culture music, folk culture music, and pop culture music.

Driscoll describes high culture music as a gourmet meal that is prepared by professionals. Its equivalent in music is opera, classical music, and ballet. The church which prefers high culture music will sing old hymns accompanied by an organ and robed choir.

Folk culture is like mom’s home cooked meal made from scratch. Folk music reflects the personal touch of local communities like black spiritual songs. This church has sold the old hymnals on Amazon.com and writes its own songs and music.

Pop music is like a fast-food meal served without the sophistication of high culture or the personal touch of folk culture. Pop music is fleeting and changing and is represented by Michael Jackson who “continually reinvented his image so thoroughly that he has transformed from a black man to a white woman” (Mark Driscoll, p. 99). Instead of a “minister of music” there is a worship team casually dressed with a keyboard, acoustic guitar, and bongos.

My question for you is, “Which meal do you prefer?” Or do you like eating at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse and Hillbilly Hide-Away and McDonalds? Is it possible for churches in our circles to have High, Folk, and Pop music if they are done in good taste? I believe it is possible.

Mark Dever offers this advice: “Healthy churches avoid worship wars. They even avoid worship skirmishes. Wise church leaders know that using a wide variety of songs and styles over time broadens a congregation’s tastes, exposing them to different kinds of music from different time periods and cultivating in them at least a modest level of appreciation for the best selection from each. Conversely, variety in worship songs and styles helps prevent people from becoming militantly entrenched in a certain style or period of music” (The Deliberate Church, page 123).

Another question of great importance for me is, “How deeply do we embed in our culture to get educated?” Driscoll discusses three responses to this issue.

The Fundamentalist is not embedded enough and is too restrictive. The Fundamentalist forbids Christians listening to certain musical styles, getting tattoos, watching movies, smoking cigarettes, consuming alcohol, and body piercing (Driscoll, 103).

The Liberal is too embedded and too permissive condoning drug use, fornication, homosexuality, and cohabitation before marriage.

The Reformissionist is not too hot or too cold but is just right (Driscoll, 103). I personally think Driscoll is embedded too deeply when he condones drinking and any musical style no matter how radically performed. Driscoll once advised, “If you’re going to be a fundamentalist or moralist… Don’t pick something stupid like, ‘Don’t listen to rock music.’ I don’t know who’s choosing all the legalisms, but they picked the worst ones” (Christianity Today magazine, April 21, 2009). At least, Rick Warren warned against the lyrics of rock music.

Here are some broad principles to help guide us in our music style choices. These principles will be interpreted differently by each of us and therefore we should allow latitude in their application in different churches in different cultures.

1. Does this music offend a weaker brother (Romans 14:13)? This is a tough one for me. If you have a blended service and use traditional hymns, Southern Gospel, and contemporary, one third of your congregation is offended all the time. Probably, “upset” is a better word than “offended.” The youth like the contemporary but not the Southern Gospel. The older generation like the traditional but not the contemporary. The group who likes Southern Gospel accuse the youth of liking rock and roll, worldly music. But Southern Gospel originated from White Jazz. So which is worldly?

Romans 14:23 says, “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” If a brother has not been taught liberty to listen to other styles, for him it may be sin (because of the wrong teaching). That weaker brother needs to be taught and hopefully he will become a strong brother who is generous in allowing others to worship to their preferences without judging them. Until a church reaches that kind of maturity we should not needlessly offend by forcing a new style on that church.

Mark Dever gives some helpful counsel: “Don’t try to change all the music all at once. Youth is the mother of impatience, and a young, highly motivated, strongly convicted pastor might tempted to drive 85 miles per hour in a church with a speed limit of 30″ (The Deliberate Church, page 124)

2. Does this music teach God’s Word (Colossians 3:16)? What about hymns that teach unbiblical concepts such as crossing Jordan River as entrance into Heaven?

3. Does this music edify other believers (1 Corinthians 10:23)? Do the lyrics build up believers.

4. Does this music appeal to my emotions more than my intellect or spirit (1 Corinthians 6:12)? The key words are “more than.” Do I want my preaching to appeal to the emotions of my listeners with tear jerking stories “more than” the intellect of my listeners with sound Bible teaching? It not either or but which has the priority in my preaching and singing. The message should trump the music.

Mark Dever says, “Simple is best. There’s certainly nothing wrong with electric guitars or a driving backbeat, and there are plenty of contemporary examples of churches and worship bands that are faithfully wedding popular music with theologically accurate lyrics. We are persuaded, though, that sparse, lightly amplified instrumentation and unobtrusive leaders are best for the weekly corporate worship gathering. The main reason is that quieter instrumentation allows the congregation to hear themselves singing, giving the lyrics center stage” (The Deliberate Church, page 122).

5. Does this music help me worship the Lord (Ephesians 5:19) or the performer? Some, not all, concerts are so entertaining that the unbiblical lyrics in the songs are overlooked because we are caught up in the performance. I recently experienced this at a church concert. The singers were so entertaining that the message at times was lost.

Mark Dever gives this advice: “Many of us have been in churches where the music leaders uses flamboyant hand motions, body language, or even facial expression. Vocalists who are intentionally self-effacing serve the congregation well by taking themselves out of the spotlight so that our attention is not directed toward them” (The Deliberate Church, page 122).

All styles of music can violate these principles if performed in the energy of the flesh and not the power of the Spirit. While some styles more easily disobey these Biblical principles more than other styles, no style is exempt. Someone well said, “The singer and the music should draw attention to the words of the song, and the words should draw attention to Christ.”

The Noncontroversial Topic of Church Music, Part One

Posted: April 20, 2009 in "Reader's Favorites", Church Ministries, Music, Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

The powerful influence of music is seen in 1 Sam. 16:14-23 when David, the greatest harpist in Israel, calmed troubled King Saul with his music. “Aristotle said, ‘Music has the power to shape character.’ Satan is clearly using music to do that today. The rock lyrics of the 1960s and 1970s shaped the values of most Americans who are now in their thirties, forties, or fifties. Today, MTV shapes the values of most people in their teens and twenties” (Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Driven Church, page 279).

The importance of music is seen in the 500 references to music in the Bible. One music department wrote: “The OT books of 1 and 2 Chronicles contain detailed instructions concerning temple worship, the appointment of spiritually qualified musicians, the training and skill level required of musicians, the use of instruments, etc. Clearly, music is a matter of great importance to God, as it should be for the Christian.”

Most Christian teachers agree that the Bible does not specify a certain style of music and here is where great controversy continues. “It is difficult to uncover a congregational definition of what constitutes good music, because choice of music is a matter of taste” (Robert Anderson, The Effective Pastor. Chicago: Moody Press, 1985, 325). A conservative Bible College addressed this issue: “While the Bible does not specifically address the issue of musical style, some standard can be established because of what has been revealed by God through natural revelation regarding the nature of man, the nature of music, and the way man responds to music. Scripture documents the fact that music is inherently capable of physical, mental, and spiritual impact upon man (1 Sam. 16:23).” In other words, while admitting that the Bible does not condone one style over another style, some styles can be deemed good or bad from other sources.

Rick Warren disagrees: “I reject the idea that music styles can be judged as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’ music. Who decides this? The kind of music you like is determined by your background and culture. Certain tones and scales sound pleasant to Asian ears; other tones and scales sound pleasant to Middle Eastern ears. Africans enjoy different rhythms than South Americans. To insist that all ‘good’ music was written in Europe two hundred years ago is cultural elitism. There certainly isn’t any biblical basis for that view” (PDC, page 281).

Warren tries to substantiate his view with debatable examples from church history. “The tune of Martin Luther’s A Mighty Fortress is Our God is borrowed from a popular song of his day. Charles Wesley used several popular tunes from the taverns and opera houses in England. John Calvin hired two secular songwriters of his day to put his theology to music. The Queen of England was so incensed by these ‘vulgar tunes’ that she derisively referred to them as Calvin’s ‘Geneva jigs’” (PDC, pages 282-3).

Dean B. McIntyre, a musician in the United Methodist Church who has an earned Ph.D. in music history from Texas Tech University refutes Warren’s claims. “The truth is that the Wesleys and Luther never made such use of saloon songs, nor would they have condoned such use. The misconception stems from confusion over a musical term—bar form. In German literature and music of the Middle Ages, ‘Bar’ was a poem consisting of three or more stanzas. It is not difficult to understand how the musical term, bar form, also sometimes referred to as bar tune can become confused in an uninformed person’s mind with barroom tune, drinking song, or some other title to indicate music to accompany the drinking of alcoholic beverages. John made use of new tunes composed or adapted from folk tunes, sacred and secular oratorio, and even operatic melodies. It should not escape us that whenever Wesley allowed the use of secular music—as from oratorio and opera—he used music of accepted high standard and almost always from classical rather than popular sources. In no instance did Wesley turn to tavern or drinking songs or other such unseemly sources to carry the sacred texts of songs and hymns.” Warren is correct in saying that different styles cannot be judged good or bad music, he is incorrect in his use of church history to substantiate his view.

While we will disagree on the styles of music used in churches, we can agree that to change the style of music in a local church is difficult. Church history is not debatable on this matter. Baptist pastor Benjamin Keach (1640-1704) was one of the first pastors to introduce congregational singing in the place of the singing of Psalms (metrical Psalms singing) in the local Baptist church in London that was later pastored by Charles Spurgeon. For more on Keach you can read a brief biography in Mark Dever’s Polity: Biblical Arguments on How to Conduct Church Life on pages 60-62. Keach, at first, could only lead his church to sing congregational songs at Communion which he did for six years. Next, he was able to sing congregational songs at days of public thanksgiving which he practiced for another 14 years. After this 20 year transition from the singing of Psalms to congregational songs, Keach was able to sing congregational songs each Sunday but only after his sermon. Even after 20 years, there were members who would leave the service in protest during the congregational singing. This group eventually left, and like good Baptists, started their own church with their preferred music. The new church did not except congregational singing until 1793 or 100 years after the battle over congregational singing began.

So what was a previous generation’s revolutionary music became the established music of the next generation. This is only one reason the choice of style in church music is difficult. We will discuss principles to help guide in the selection of music style in the next post.

Older Entries