Posts Tagged ‘Ed Stetzer’

Why 20-29 Year Olds Stop Coming To Church: Hypocrites

Posted: February 22, 2012 in Sermons
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

One of the greatest evidences of true Christianity is a changed life. One of the greatest proofs to a skeptical world is a changed life. One of the greatest hindrances to the world is the absence of a changed life. One opponent of Christianity said, “Scratch a Christian and you will find a pagan.”

Michael Duduit, editor of Preaching Magizine interviewed missiologist Ed Stetzer about his new book Lost and Found. In this book Stetzer tells us how to reach the young unchurched. Stetzer said among the unchurched 20-29 year olds that he surveyed, 81% believed in God or a higher power and 57% believe that there is only one God, the God of the Bible. But this same group said the church was full of hypocrites and not helpful to their spiritual growth. Preaching and living the book of Ephesians,with its doctrine of the church, can be a remedy.

In Ephesians 4-6, Paul is showing us what the changed life looks like.

1. Ephesians 4:1-16 “Wherefore Walk” in Unity. Christianity is a lifestyle where God’s people humbly co-operate by using their spiritual gifts unselfishly for the good of others.

2. Ephesians 4:17-32 “Wherefore Walk” not as the Unsaved. Christianity is a lifestyle different from the unbelievers.

Paul first described what the unsaved lifestyle, “the old man,” with his old, sinful nature looks like in 4:17-19. It is totally depraved.

Next, Paul explained that the believer is now a “new man” with a new nature in 4:20-24.

Finally, Paul described what the new lifestyle of “the new man” with his new nature looks like in day to day living in 4:25-32.

There is a constant 24 hours a day battle between the old and new natures in a believer as Paul described in Galatians 5:17: “The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other.” Paul calls this struggle a war in Romans 7:23. Have you experienced this 24 seven conflict. The alarm goes off in the morning, and what does the flesh say? “Don’t move. This feels too good just to get up and read the Bible. Hit the sloth, I mean, snooze button.”

John MacArthur rejects the terminology of the old nature in a believer: “The new nature is not added to the old nature but replaces it….Sin is still resident in the flesh….Biblical terminology, then, does not say that a Christian has two different natures. He has but one nature, the new nature in Christ. The old self dies and the new self lives; they do not coexist. It is not a remaining old nature but the remaining garment of sinful flesh that causes Christians to sin (page 164)….It (sin) is still present in the flesh, the body, the unredeemed humanness that includes the whole human person’s thinking and behavior…Paul summarizes the dichotomy with these words: ‘So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind [synonymous here with the new self] am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh [synonymous here with unredeemed humanness contained in our sinful bodies] the law of sin (Rom. 7:25)” (Ephesians, page 179).

What some theologians call the “old nature” MacArthur calls “flesh,” “remaining garment of sinful flesh,” “the body, the unredeemed humanness that includes the whole human person’s thinking and behavior.”

Renald E. Showers wrote an entire book on this subject called The New Nature in which he defends the terminology of old and new natures in believers.

1. There is a board definition of “nature:” “A nature is a complex of attributes” such as human nature and divine nature. Jesus was one person with two natures: Divine and human (The New Nature, page 16).

2. There is a narrow definition of “nature:” “A nature is that inherent disposition of a person that affects his conduct and character (page 17.”)

The sinner has an old sinful nature or disposition (narrow definition) in his human nature (board definition).

The believer has an old and new nature or disposition (narrow definition) in his human nature (board definition).

Before The Fall

Before the Fall, Adam had only a human nature with a favorable to God but unconfirmed disposition. When Adam was tempted by Satan, Adam choose to rebel against God and lost his favorable disposition and was confirmed with an unfavorable, sinful disposition or nature of enmity against God. Therefore Adam no longer met daily with God (Genesis 3:8) (page 24).

After The Fall

Every person is born with a sinful nature in his human nature (Psalm 51:5).

1. That sin nature is called “sin” in Romans 6:2, 7, “carnal” (Romans 7:14), “flesh” (Romans 8:5-7; Galatians 5:17). Paul in Romans 7:14 said, “I am carnal, sold under sin.” Paul was not carnal or fleshly like the Corinthians in 3:2, but he had a fleshly nature 24 seven. “Certain types of criminals were executed by the Romans with special brutality. Sometimes if the man had committed a murder, he was bound hand to hand, face to face with the corpse of his victim and then thrown out into the heat of the Mediterranean sun. As the corpse decayed, it ate death into the living man and became to him, in the strictest literal sense, ‘a body of death’” (John Phillips. Exploring Romans, Chicago: Moody Press, 1969, page 119). What that dying corpse was to the murderer, the old nature was to Paul and every believer, a reality we can not rid our lives of in this life.

2. The sin nature in the sinner is like a slave master that rules his life (Romans 6:6), an unwanted guest who takes over the owner’s house against his wishes (Romans 7:17), and an armed soldier that wages war against the believer’s mind (Roman 7:23) (The New Nature, page 63).

3. Theologians call this sinful condition “total depravity.” Paul describes total depravity in Ephesians 4:17-19. Totally depravity means that the Fall of Adam totally affected every fiber of our being.

a) Our minds were totally affected or depraved because of the Fall: “vanity of the mind,” “understanding darkened,” “ignorance that is in them” and “blindness of the heart” which includes the mind.

b) Our emotions were totally depraved: “who being passed feeling.” The unregenerate person has no shame or sensitivity to God concerning their sin.

c) Our wills were totally depraved: “Have given themselves over to lasciviousness” or sexual indecency “to work all uncleanness” which is sexual impurity according to Galatians 5:19, and “greediness” or covetousness or idolatry in Colossians 3:5. The same language is used in Romans 1:24, 26, and 28 when Paul says, God “gave them over.”

First, the sinner gives himself over to sin (Ephesians 4:17-19) in his total depravity.

Then, God gives him over to the consequences of his sin (Romans 1:24, 26, 28).

At Conversion

1. At conversion, “the old man” is “put off” in Ephesians 4:20-22. At salvation, the believing sinner ceased being “the old man” or the unregenerate man who was corrupting, deceiving, and lustful. The same word is used in Acts 7:58 to describe the members of the Sanhedrin who “laid down” their outer garments to more easily stone Stephen. MacArthur illustrates this word and action: “Many rescue missions have a delousing room, where derelicts who have not had a bath in months discard all their old clothes and are thoroughly bathed and disinfected. The unsalvageable old clothes are burned and new clothes are issued. The clean man is provided clean clothes” (Ephesians, page 179). Conversion is even more drastic than this experience.

2. At conversion, we gain a new nature in Ephesians 4:23. Not only is the believer no longer unregenerate, but has the resource to live for God by being continually renewed in the spirit of his mind or new nature (Romans 7:23). Whereas the putting off of “the old man” is final the renewing of the new nature in ongoing. The mind of the unregenerate is empty, darkened, ignorant and blind, but the mind of the believer is renewed by the process Paul lays out in Romans 12:1-2.

3. At conversion, “the new man” (the regenerate man) is “put on” in Ephesians 4:24. The believing sinner put off the unregenerate life, and he put on the regenerate life “which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” God created Adam after His image which was marred at the Fall but not completely destroyed (Genesis 9:6). What was lost in the Fall of Adam, however, has been regained by Christ at our salvation as a new creation of the likeness of God “in righteousness and true holiness” (Colossians 3:10). Paul put this blessed truth concisely in one verse in 2 Corinthians 5:17: “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creation, old things (the unregenerate old man) are passed away and all things (the regenerated new man) are new.”

In my next post, I will continue with the ministry of the Holy Spirit through our new nature to produce righteousness and true holiness in our lives as believers.

The Church’s Missional Statement by Christ

Posted: January 19, 2012 in Church Ministries
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

All nationalities should be welcomed and accepted in our churches. This is what makes the church Missional. Missional church researcher Ed Stetzer warns against being missional in wanting to reach your local culture but not being Missions in wanting to reach those not in your culture. Some Missional churches are focused on the local not the global. Some Missions churches are only concerned with cultures an ocean away. The remedy is for the church to be “glocal” as Bob Roberts says in Transformation: How Glocal Churches Transform Lives and the World. Driscoll, in Vintage Church, gives a good introduction to the Missional movement in chapter nine, “What is a Missional Church?” He strikes a balance: “It is unfortunate that foreign missions is not part of the vision of many missional churches….It is also unfortunate the local community is lacking from the vision of many missions churches….Subsequently, their youth spends ten days building a house in Mexico rather doing repairs on the run-down apartment building across the street” (page 242).

Christ’s mission statement for the Church is combined in five commission passages not just in the Matthew 28 version. We should interpret the great commission of Matthew 28:19-20 in the context of all five statements. The five commission passages were taught by Jesus over the 40 day post-resurrection period. The five statements combined give us the Great Commission:

We have been sent to make disciples by preaching the Gospel to every person which is the first step in making disciples which includes preaching repentance through the power of the Holy Spirit to the ends of the earth.

1.  We Have Been Sent (John 20:19) given on the first Easter in Jerusalem

2. To Make Disciples (Matthew 28:19-20) added two weeks later in Galilee

3. By Preaching the Gospel to every person which is the first step in making disciples (Mark 16:15) possibly stated at the same time of Matthew 28

4. Which includes preaching repentance (Luke 24:47) given just before His ascension in Jerusalem

5. Through the power of the Holy Spirit to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8) also stated just before His ascension

If our commission is to make disciple then we need to be able to profile a disciple.

1. A Disciple is an obedient follower of Christ.

In Matthew 28:1-15, the Jewish leaders reject Christ on the first Easter. In Matthew 28:16, at least two weeks later, the disciples obey Christ. Matthew juxtapositions these two responses by splicing them together with “But” to give the effect they happened one after the other to contrast disobedience and obedience.

Jesus describes a disciple as a believer who obeys His commands in John 15:8-10. The disciples who obeyed Christ to meet with Him in Galilee traveled probably by foot for five days from Jerusalem. Unlike all the other post-resurrection appearances, this one was announced and for this reason there were probably 500 believers there (1 Corinthians 15:6). Obedience is not always easy.

2. A disciple has a ministry to people to perform for the Lord. The Great Commission in Matthew was given in “Galilee of the Gentiles” (Matthew 4:15). The setting of the great commission was among unsaved Gentiles. The Reformers believed the Great Commission was given only to the eleven. In other words, we are not responsible to reach our generation for Christ. Why is the Reformer’s interpretation wrong?

First, because the eleven did evangelize all nations. They also did not evangelize unto the end of the age. Lastly, non-apostles like Philip and Stephen participated in the Great Commission in Acts.

Now that we have examined the remote and immediate context of the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20 let’s unpack its content.

1. The Proclamation of Jesus’ New Authority (Matthew 28:18) 

All authority has been given to Christ in heaven and in earth because of His resurrection (Romans 1:4). There is no reference to Christ’s ascension to heaven in Matthew but Jesus speaks as one already in Heaven ruling over all creation.

Alexander McClaren writes of the investiture granted Christ: “And so the hands that were pierced with the nails wield the sceptre of the Universe, and on the brows that were wounded and bleeding with the crown of thorns are wreathed the many crowns of universal kinghood.”

2. His Plan for the Church (Matthew 28:19-20a)

The Great Commission based on the authority of Christ is seen in Jesus’ “Therefore.”

The great commission centers on the one imperative “make disciples.” We disciple “all nations” which is a plural collective that describes the whole world outside the community of believers (Luke 24:47).

The method for obeying our authoritative King for making disciples is laid out in the three particles (verbs that serve as adjectives).

A. The Method of Evangelization “Having gone”

1) Through confrontation as in Acts 8 when Philip goes takes the gospel to the Ethiopian bachelor. Sometimes God opens the door to witness to a total stranger who sits down beside you on a commerical flight.

2) Through friendship as in John 1:40 when Andrew brings his brother Peter to Christ. The person who impacted my life more than anyone and was responsible for my salvation was my godly mother.

3) Through event evangelism as in Acts 10 when Peter preaches to the friends and family of Cornelius. Elmer Towns made popular “Friend Day” which has been by God to bring many to Christ.

B. The Method of Assimilation “Baptizing”

Baptism is a public pledge of our discipleship. Baptism identifies us with the local church as in Acts 2:41-42. Baptism is, however, more than getting the new convert all wet. Baptism is immersing the new convert into the life of the church. Entry level ministries like AWANA can help with getting them plugged in.

C. The Method of Education “Teaching them”

The Great Commission version in Matthew was given in the context of five major sermons in Matthew interspersed in the narrative of Matthew’s theme of the Messiahship of Christ.

The narrative in Matthew 3:1-4:25 discusses the Birth of the King

1st Sermon: Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7)

The narrative in Matthew 8:1-10:4 presents the credentials of the King

2nd Sermon: Mission to Israel (Matthew 10:5-11:1)

The narrative in Matthew 11:2-12:50 records the first rejection of the King

3rd Sermon (Matthew 13) Parables of the Mystery form of the Kingdom for reaching Gentiles in this age

The narrative in Matthew 13:54-17:27 records the second rejection of the King

4th Sermon (Matthew 18:1-19:2) Principles of the Kingdom

The narrative in Matthew 19:3-23:39 describes the presentation of the King

5th Sermon (Matthew 24-25) Olivet Discourse/Future Return of the King

The narrative in Matthew 28:1-15 details the Death and Resurrection of Christ

Now that Jesus is ascended back to Heaven, the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20 commands the church to carry on the same teaching ministry. We teach people “them” not just lessons or sermons. We teach to transform them not just to inform them.

3. The Promise of His Enduring Presence (Matthew 28:20b) 

As we fulfill the Great Commission Christ promises to be with us in blessing our ministry. This is not just the omnipresence of Christ but the blessing of His approval as we implement the great commission. Paul experienced this presence in Acts 18:9-10.

It has been said that a church’s greatness is not in its seating capacity but in its sending capacity. As we understand and obey Christ’s mission statement God will bless us with disciple making disciples at home and around the world.

Ordination for God Called Men to Pastor, Part 2

Posted: August 31, 2010 in Pastoral Theology
Tags: ,
6

In spite of the abuses of ordination noted in part 1, Hammett believes “there is a biblical basis for recognizing leaders in some way, and a properly understood practice of education could serve some positive purposes.” Hammett sees four positive results of ordination.

The First Positive Result

Hammett sees ordination as part of the church’s corporate affirmation of God’s call in a pastor’s or missionary’s life. In my posts on God’s Call To Preach, I give the three evidences of God’s call to preach. The first is a God given desire to preach (1Timothy 3:1). The next is a God given ability as stated in the 1 Timothy 1:12. The last evidence is the recognition of the church which was the case in Acts 13:1-3 or as Hammett states it, the church’s corporate affirmation of God’s call.

In Acts 6:1-6, deacons were ordained when the apostles laid hands on the ones selected by the church. In Acts 13:1-3, the church laid hands on Paul and Barnabas. The word for “appoint” in Acts 6:3 is kathistemi and is also used in Titus 1:5 for Titus appointing “elders in every city.” Kathistemi as well is found “three times in Hebrews for the appointment or ordination of priests (5:1; 7:28; 8:1), and does seem associated with an official type of appointment. The word used in Acts 14:23, cheirotoneo, can mean choose or elect by raising hands, raising the question of congregational involvement. The context seems to indicate that Paul and Barnabas appointed the elders in this case, but the active role of the congregation elsewhere in Acts argues for at least the concurrence of the congregations” (Hammett, 205).

The laying on of hands is mentioned twice in reference to Timothy’s ordination in 1 Timothy 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6. There is another mention of laying on hands in 1 Timothy 5:22, where Paul warns Timothy not to “lays hands suddenly” on a man. Hammett believes this “is probably a reference to ordination of elders, since it is found in a section dealing with elders” (page 205).

Hammett sees a Second Positive Result of ordination

Ordination allows the church to recognize church leaders as certain passages call for. Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 commands the church to esteem their pastors. Hebrews 13:17 commands congregations to “obey” their pastors. These texts help Pastor/People relationships and ordination sets God called men apart so these Scriptures can be followed.

“A Third Positive Result of a careful practice of ordination could be the protection of churches from ill-prepared, unqualified, or heretical pastors” (page 208). Hammett acknowledges that “the current practice of ordination in many Baptist churches is so casual that it affords little protection. One proof of this casual attitude is the fact that no one, at least in my experience, has ever been denied ordination” (Hammett, 208). One of my teachers once said all that was required for the ordination of a candidate in my state was a coonskin cap.

Before the ordination council meets with the candidate, the local church votes and approves for the ordination council to examine and ordain the candidate because that local church is already convinced of his call, character, gifts, and doctrine. So the ordination council cannot bear the full responsibility.

This is another reason why it is important for the local church to require a regenerated church membership and a church polity of congregational rule through which God accomplishes His will through the priesthood of believers.

The Fourth Positive Result of ordination has to do with the United States’ legal system. There are some tax advantages. Also some states require ordination before a pastor can perform weddings. “Such pragmatic, legal reasons perhaps would not be sufficient to justify ordination in and of themselves, but neither are they unimportant or unworthy of consideration. Thus, the advantages of ordination clearly outweigh the dangers, as long as its meaning is clearly and carefully explained” (Hammett, page 208).

Ordination of God Called Men to Pastor, Part 1

Posted: August 31, 2010 in Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , ,
7

Ordination is part of the debate between the Missional and Missions Church. The Missional church teaches all believers are called to minister and therefore opposes the ordination of those called to the ministry.

In his book, So Beautiful, Leonard Sweet  rejects God called pastors, ordination, and any distinction between clergy and laity calling such ideas “heresy.”

Sweet writes: Presbyterian Robert T. Henderson and Southern Baptist Ed Stetzer are calling loudly for the de-clergification of the church. How “clergified” is your church? If the distinctions of “clergy” and “laity” are not biblical, where should our emphasis be—abolishing the clergy and making all of them ministers, or abolishing the laity and making all of us ministers?

Even the popular The Trellis and the Vine states “The Bible doesn’t speak of people being ‘called’ to be a doctor or a lawyer or a missionary or a pastor. God calls us to himself, to be Christians” (page 133).

Luke, however, records God calling Barnabas and Paul in Acts 13:1-3 and the church at Antioch ordaining them: “As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away.”

The authors of The Trellis and the Vine also argue: “It is common to wait for someone to say to us that they ‘feel called to the ministry’ or that they ‘think that God is calling me to be a missionary’ before we start to assess their suitability. The Bible does not speak in these terms. Search as we may, we don’t find in the Bible any example or concept of an inner call to the ministry” (The Trellis and the Vine, page 133).

There are examples in the Bible! Paul in 1 Timothy 3:1 does speak of the inner desire to pastor.  In 1 Corinthians 9:16-18, Paul describes his desire becoming an irrestible complusion to preach.

The Missions church also believes that every believer has a general call to ministry (Ephesians 4:1) but that the Scriptures also teach that God calls men to preach and pastor.

Even before the Missional/Missions debate over the call of God and ordinations, Raymond Bailey made the following suggestion: “Perhaps the doctrine of the priesthood of believers could best be demonstrated by doing away with ordination altogether. It may well be that the greater diversity of ministries does not call for more ordinations but for the abolition of the practice as counter-productive to the missions of the church in the modern world” (Raymond Bailey, “Multiple Ministries and Ordination, Review and Expositor 78, no. 4, 1981: 533).

John Hammett noted that Bailey also suggested “that we could observe baptism as the ordination of every believer for service and thus find a way to affirm all believers in their call to ministy” (John S. Hammett. Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005, 206). It doesn’t have to be either or as the Missional church often demands. Why not emphasize at a new convert’s baptism that the ordinance of baptism is the believer’s committment to discipleship, as taught in the Matthew 28:19-20, and ministry because every believer has been equipped by the Holy Spirit with a spiritual gift to serve the Lord. This can be done without neglecting Scriptural ordination for God called men to preach and pastor.

Certainly there are problems with the way ordinations have been viewed and practiced through the centuries. Ordination early in church history was considered a sacrament and part of the apostolic succession. John S. Hammett writes about some of the abuses connected to ordination. Hammett mentions E. Glen Hinson who writes that pastors who were ordained “were thought to differ essentially not just functionally from the laity” (Ordination in Christian History. Review and Expositor 78, no. 4, 198: 485). Also “the most famous Baptist of the late nineteenth century, C. H. Spurgeon, refused ordination due to the sacramental understanding common in England” (Hammett, 206).

In spite of the abuses, Hammett believes “there is a biblical basis for recognizing leaders in some way, and a properly understood practice of education could serve some positive purposes.” Hammett see four positive results of ordination which will be presented in part 2.

The Call to Preach, Part 1

Posted: August 17, 2010 in Homiletics/Preaching, Pastoral Theology
Tags: , , , ,
1

The debate between advocates of the Missions Church and the Missional Church (old conservative wing of the Emerging Church) continues:

The Missions Church emphasizes global missions and the Missional church emphasizes your local culture, i.e., your city. The Missions Church stresses a special call to the Ministry and the Missional church stresses a call to ministry. The Missions church emphasizes a professional ministry and the Missional church a ministry for everyone. Which is correct? Both.

In his book, So Beautiful, Leonard Sweet slams God called pastors, ordinations, and any distinction between clergy and laity calling such ideas “heresy.”

Sweet writes: Presbyterian Robert T. Henderson and Southern Baptist Ed Stetzer are calling loudly for the de-clergification of the church. How “clergified” is your church? If the distinctions of “clergy” and “laity” are not biblical, where should our emphasis be—abolishing the clergy and making all of them ministers, or abolishing the laity and making all of us ministers?

The heresy of clerisy (only priests are ministers) is killing the church. I heard the story of a member of the church approaching their pastor and telling him that they had been called into full-time ministry. The pastor did not respond in the manner they were expecting when he said, “Oh, I thought you were a Christian.”

This set the member back a bit. He answered that of course he was a Christian. Then the pastor said, “Then, too late…” by which he meant that when we became disciples of Jesus, we accepted the call into full-time ministry.

So much of the time we write a check and think we have done our part. Or, if we are really trying to be spiritual, we may go on a mission project for a few days a year. In reality Christ turns us into “Mission 365,” as my friend Tom Ingram calls it. We are in mission in the car, in mission at the grocery store, in mission at Starbucks, in mission on Twitter.

It is time to abolish the laity and make everyone clergy, “minister.” Or maybe we should abolish the clergy and make everyone laity, “ministers” (Leonard Sweet. SO BEAUTIFUL. Colorado Springs, David C. Cook, 2009, pages 5, 7).

Ed Stetzer defines clergification: This is the belief that the professionals carry out the real work of the church, and everyone else simply lends a hand here and there and says we should reject the “called to the ministry” for “called to ministry.”

I agree that there are abuses of vocational ministries as Stetzer rightly exposes. But that does not mean we abandon what is taught in Scripture? There is a special call of God to men to preach His Word. But, there is also a general call to all believers to serve (Ephesians 4:1). This attitude and view of Leonard Sweet is in stark contrast to some of the most influential preachers and teachers of preachers of the past and present.

Homilitican Lloyd Perry (Warren Wiersbe’s teacher): “The primary requirement for preaching is a divine call to preach” (A Manual for Biblical Preaching, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965, page 4).

Pastor W.H. Griffith Thomas: “This is the Divine Call, and it is the foundation of all else” (Ministerial Life and Work, Chicago: The Institute Colportage Association, 1927, page 27).

Pastor and author on preaching Martin Lloyd-Jones: “Nothing but this overwhelming sense of being called and of compulsion should ever lead anyone to preach” (Preaching and Preachers, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972, page 107).

Homilitican John Broadus: “The preacher should be a person with a call from God. Ministers are called as professionals, but they should never be persons with just a profession” (On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, ed. Vernon C. Stanfield, 4th ed., rev. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1979, page 13).

Charles Spurgeon: “It is a fearful calamity to a man to miss his calling” (Lectures to My Students, Grand Rapids: Associate Publisher and Authors, n.d., page 22).

G. Campbell Morgan: “The only men who can really enter this ministry are those whom the Lord chooses, calls, and equips, by the bestowment of gifts according to the wisdom of His will” (The Ministry of the Word, New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1919, page 127).

John R. W. Stott: Will Sangster, in his well-known book The Craft of the Sermon wrote, “Called to preach! . . . Commissioned of God to teach the word! A herald of the great King! A witness of the Eternal Gospel! (Between Two Worlds, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982, page 43).

John MacArthur: “The gospel is spread by men whom God calls to proclaim it” (Ephesians. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1986, page 93).

Al Mohler: “No one should even contemplate such an endeavor without absolute confidence in a divine call to preach and in the unblemished authority of the Scriptures” (He is Not Silent, page 71).

John Piper:  ”The calling to preach and pastor had become irresistible.”

Warren Wiersbe: “The work of the ministry is too demanding and difficult for a  man to enter it without a sense of divine calling. Men enter and the leave the ministry usually because they lack a sense of divine urgency. Nothing less than a definite call from God could ever give a man succes in the ministry” (Howard F. Sugden and Warren W. Wiersbe, When Pastors Wonder How. Chicago: Moody, 1973, page 9).

Erwin Lutzer: I don’t see how anyone could survive in the ministry if he felt it was just his own choice. Some ministers scarcely have two good days back to back. They are sustained by the knowledge that God has placed them where they are. Ministers without such a conviction often lack courage and carry their resignation letter in their coat pocket. At the slightest hint of difficulty, they’re gone” (Erwin W. Lutzer. “Still Called to the Ministry” Moody Monthly 83, no. 7 March 1983: 133).

The Call to The Ministry and The Call to Ministry is not Either/Or but Both/And.

God called Paul to preach the truths in Ephesians 3:1-6 as he states in 3:7: “I was made a minister.” This historically happened in Acts 26:14-18.

1. What are the Evidences of God’s Call to the Ministry?

A. A God given desire to preach.

“The primary way this intuitive understanding of the call is manifested according to the New Testament is a desire (the Greek word is used only three times in the NT: 1 Tim 3:1; 6:10; Hebrews 11:16) for the ministry (I Timothy 3:1), caused by God (Philippians 2:12-13), and growing into a virtually irresistible constraint (1 Corinthians 9:16)” (Stephen J. Hankins. The Call to the Christian Ministry. Biblical Viewpoint: Unusual Press: Bob Jones University, n.d. page 88). When men would come to Spurgeon who were struggling with the call to the ministry of preaching and pastoring he is credited with saying, “If you can do anything else and be happy, then do it” (Lectures, page 23).

God uses desires to lead all believers into His will as Psalm 37:4 indicates: “Delight yourself in the LORD; and he shall give you the desires of your heart.” Again, it is not either/or but both/and. God calls some men specifically to preach through a desire for His will and God leads other believers through desire into other ministries.

B. A God given ability.

“God never calls without equipping, and the very fact of equipment proves the call (Ephesians 4:11)” wrote W. H. Griffith Thomas (page 94). Paul refers to this reality in his life in Ephesians 3:7. Paul was made a minister by God to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ, in other words, the ministry of preaching for Paul was not a career choice. In the same verse, Paul informs us that the God who called him equipped him with “the effectual working of His power.”

Spurgeon elaborated: “I should not complete this point if I did not add, that mere ability to edify, and aptness to teach is not enough; there must be other talents to complete the pastoral character. Sound judgment and solid experience must instruct you; gentle manners and loving affections must sway you; firmness and courage must be manifest and tenderness and sympathy must not be lacking. Gifts administrative in ruling well will be as requisite as gifts instructive in teaching well” (Lectures, page 28).

C. A God given recognition.

“The man who thinks he is called to the ministry must also meet, to a blameless degree, the qualifications presented by Paul in formal lists in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9… A man cannot lead people who refuse to follow him, nor can he provide spiritual food and protection for those who do not accept him as a shepherd” (Hankins, page 89).

“The Bible says more about what a leader is to be than what a leader is to do. Phillip Brooks, a prominent clergyman during the nineteenth century, says of this important subject,:’What the minister is is far more important than what he is able to do, for what he is gives force to what he does. In the long run, ministry is what we are as much as what we do” (“The Call to Pastoral Ministry”, page 114 in MacArthur’s Rediscovering Pastoral Ministry).

The local church at Antioch recognized that the Holy Spirit had called Barnabas and Paul to plant churches, laid hands on them, and sent them out as the church’s first missionaries (Acts 13:1-3).

Spurgeon added, “Whether you value the verdict of the church or no, one thing is certain, that none of you can be pastors without the loving consent of the flock; and therefore this will be to you a practical indicator if not a correct one” (Lectures, page 29).

“The procedure of ordination, which is the step of publicly recognizing one set apart for the ministry” (James M. George. “The Call to Pastoral Ministry. Rediscovering Pastoral Ministry, page 107).

See Part 2 for The Characteristics of God’s Call to the Ministry

Contextualize without Compromise, Part 2

Posted: June 9, 2010 in Contextualization
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

GBC Sermon Audio – June 6 PM, 2010

I was recently asked by a church member about Bob Harrington, who was named “The Chaplain of Bourbon Street” by the major of New Orleans in 1963. I had almost forgotten about him. Billy Graham said Bob Harrington was “bringing a witness for Jesus Christ to the middle of hell.” Bob Harrington engaged a wicked culture for 20 years until that culture overtook him and he fell into immorality. His daughter gives her perspective on this sad episode in her family’s life. She writes about her “Prodigal Father.” Engaging the culture is like trying to stand on a razor’s edge. You can easily fall to the left into syncretism or to the right into isolationism. Paul’s three principles will support us to maintain our balance.

1. We Do Not Change our Message to Engage our Culture. See Part 1

2. We Do Adapt our Methods to Engage our Culture.

We want to observe three Biblical examples of our second principle (Timothy, Paul, and Jesus).

A. This is what Paul did with Timothy in Acts 16 when Paul had Timothy circumcised. There are two differences between the circumcision of Titus and Timothy. Paul would not allow Gentile Titus to be circumcised by Jewish Judaizers because the issue was salvation. Paul did permit Timothy who was half Jew and half Gentile to be circumcised in order to witness to Jews. Timothy was to be circumcised because the men in his Jewish audiences were circumcised. This is called “Incarnational missions.”

J. Hudson Taylor lived among the Chinese and became one with them to win them. Without changing his message he dressed like the Chinese and cut his hair like them because he was one of them. He shaved his head except for a long pony tail. He engaged their culture without compromising his message.

If you are going to reach unsaved motorcycle gangs you don’t wear a three piece suit and drive a BMW. You wear boots, blue jeans, a leather jacket, with your wallet chained to your belt and ride a Harley.

B. Paul gave guidelines on how far we go in adapting to the culture we are seeking to reach in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 . We do what we do for “the sake of the gospel.” We have gone too far when the Gospel message has been diluted.

1. To the Jews Paul became like their Jewish culture. This is why Paul had Timothy circumcised. Paul in Acts 18:18, after observing a Jewish Nazarite Vow, cut his hair.

2. To the Gentiles Paul became like their Gentile culture.

When Paul preached to Jews, he preached from the Old Testament. When Paul preached to Gentiles, he did not preach from the Old Testament. In Acts 17:22- 27, Paul built bridges to the pagan culture.  He refers to the altar of the unknown God and told them that he was going to inform them who that unknown God was. I had a student one time who was witnessing to a Jehovah’s Witness and used her Bible to prove the deity of Christ and to win her to the Lord. This is not the same as using the Koran which declares belief in the deity of Christ blasphemy. The altar to the unknown God was not a denial of the deity of Christ. The New World Translation is the Bible mistranslated in key verses pertaining to the deity of Christ, however, with other verses that can be used to prove the deity of Christ.

Tim Keller contrasts Paul’s methods:

Examples of how Paul adapts to new cultures abound in Acts. They are literally everywhere. Even Jay Adams, fairly rock-ribbed conservative in everyway, wrote a book Audience Adaptations in the Sermons and Speeches of Paul. In Acts 13 we see Paul sharing the gospel in a synagogue to those who believed in the God of the Bible, and in Acts 14 we see him sharing the gospel to a pagan, blue-collar crowd. The differences and similarities are striking.

a) His citation of authority is very different. In the first case he quotes Scripture and John the Baptist. In the second, he argues from general revelation–greatness of creation.

b) They differ in emphasis of content. Hard to miss that with Jews and God-fearers he ignores the doctrine of God and gets right to Christ; with pagans here and Acts 17, he labors the very concept of God.

c) Finally, they differ in even the form of the final appeal–how to ‘close’ with Christ–is different. In Acts 13:39 Paul speaks of the law of God and says, essentially: “you think you are good, but you aren’t good enough! You need Christ to justify you.” But in 14 he tells them to turn from “worthless things”–idols–”to the living God” who he says is the real source of “joy”–he, not material things–is the real source. So he is saying, in effect: “you think you are free–but you are not! You are enslaved to dead idols.”

d) Despite all these very profound differences– (1) Both audiences are told about a God who is both powerful yet good (13:16-22; 14:17), (2) in both he tells the hearers they are trying to save themselves in a wrong way (moral people by trying to obey the law 13:39 and pagans by giving themselves to idols and gods that cannot satisfy 14:15), and (3) both tell hearers not to turn to some scheme of performance, but that God has broken in to history now to accomplish our salvation. Even the speech of chapter 14, which was a spontaneous outburst, though it doesn’t mention Christ directly, still points to the fact that salvation is something accomplished by God for us in history, not something we do.

3. Paul adapted to his audience without changing his message.

C. Jesus adjusted to His culture according to John 1:1, 14.

1. The Son of God not only became man but He became a Jewish man. Jesus was circumcised, attended the synagogue, ate Kosher food, and keep the Sabbath. He perfectly kept the Jewish Law (Matthew 5:18-18).

2. Jesus adjusted to his culture without compromising His message. It was because of His clear claims to be the Messiah and God that His Jewish culture perfectly understood. They just disagreed and crucified Him as a false prophet.

3. Jesus was also criticized for going too far in His associations with sinners. Jesus was accused of being a glutton and binge drinker (Matthew 11:19). Martin Luther said if you are never accused of antinomianism you are not preaching the gospel.

4. Engaging the culture, however, can go too far and lead to syncretism. King Solomon in his exposure to the surrounding cultures, succumbed and added the gods of the pagan cultures to Israel’s religion (1 Kings 11).

The SBC International Mission Broad (IMB) Principles of Contextualization says, “The theological construct represented by the term “Allah” in the Quranic system is deficient and unacceptable. However, the primary issue is not the term. The same name is used by devout Christians and it represents a sound, scriptural view of God. In fact, historically, the Christian use of “Allah” predates the rise of Islam. The missionary task is to teach who “Allah” truly is in accord with biblical revelation.” Even though Ed Stetzer approves this method I have some problems with the extent of this contextualization. Why not just teach the Muslim culture a new word, “God” or “Jesus?

Another example is provided by John Hammett. “Phil Parshall, one of the leading advocates of contextualizing the church in Islamic culture, has recently written of the danger of contextualization crossing a line and becoming syncretism, a harmful blending of Christianity with other teachings. He examines the strategy of a Christian missionary joining a Muslin mosque for the purpose of becoming a Muslim to reach Muslims, and concludes that the practice is open to the charge of unethical and sub-Christian activity” (John Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology. Grand Rapids: Kregal, 2005, 345).

I like this example from David Sills on the contextualizing the gospel without compromise: Many missionaries provide a biblical worldview by teaching the grand narrative of God’s revelation through chronological Bible story telling. Some detractors of contextualization believe that we need only preach the gospel as we do back “home,” and this will be sufficient. However, in matriarchal societies, for instance, the mother is the most important figure. Women run the home, serve as rulers, and inherit from their female family members. If the father is even known, he is viewed as a biological necessity and not as an important person in life. When there is an important male figure, it will be the mother’s brother. How will we present the gospel here? Without studying to know the culture to contextualize the gospel, a sermon on God the Father would leave the hearers with a deficient view of God. In such cases, should we allow the culture to contextualize at will and preach God the Mother? Or, should we strike a compromise and preach God the Uncle? Of course, none of these would result in a biblical understanding of the gospel. The missionary preacher who has studied the culture must recognize the challenges and teach the culture the biblical view of God as Father. While such a practice flies in the face of modern anthropology, it is the biblical approach to properly contextualizing the gospel and Christianity among a people.
In my next post, I will give the third principle for engaging our changing culture without compromising our message.

Contextualize without Compromise, Part 1

Posted: June 8, 2010 in Contextualization
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1

GBC Sermon Audio – June 6 AM, 2010

The New South is growing.

“Through urbanization and the vibrant growth of southern cities and towns, the South is becoming a center for innovative, intellectual and cultural growth”, reports Advance the Church. Advance the Church also provided some of the following information.

This will greatly impact the way we do church.

Right now the South is the fastest growing region in our nation. In the 30 year period between 1995 and 2025, according to the US Census Bureau, the South will be the most populated region in our country. For example, North Carolina will grow by 1 million.

The Hispanic population is projected to increase rapidly over the 1995 to 2025 projection period, accounting for 44 percent of the growth in the Nation’s population (32 million Hispanics out of a total of 72 million persons added to the Nation’s population).

“In one generation’s time, there won’t even be the nominal Christianity in the South that there is now. The mega-churches will flounder and people will just stop going. They are only going now because it is somewhat expected—part of the culture—or as some moral exercise” -Tim Keller

We are not only growing in numbers but in age.

The first of the Baby Boom generation (those born between 1946 and 1964) reach retirement age in 2010. The percentage of the population that is elderly will increase rapidly in the South. The South is predicted to have 32 million deaths before 2025.

The South is also growing younger. The South will see 43 million births before 2025. How will our church respond to these cultural changes?

Paul in Romans 10:14 asked this question, “How shall they hear without a preacher?” He then added in verse 17, “Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.”  From these statements, we know we must not only witness and preach the gospel, but we must witness and preach so our culturally changing listeners will hear, understand, and respond.

We must communicate our message so our culture comprehends what we are saying without changing our message.

This is called contextualization which is “communicating the gospel in a more understandable, culturally relevant form”

(David J. Hesselgrave & Edward Rommen. Contextualization: Meanings, Methods, and Models. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989, 2).

We have already allowed our culture to influence not only what we teach and preach but how we teach and preach. I’m preaching in English not the Biblical languages of Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic. I have contextualized the medium not the message.

Multinational corporations market their products according to their cultures. For example, McDonalds sell hamburgers in Malaysia. Over half of the population in Malaysia is Muslim. But the female cashiers in Malaysia behind the counter wear their little paper hats on top of their head-coverings and they call their products “beefburgers” not hamburgers. If they call their Big Macs “hamburgers” their Muslim customers would not eat there. Has McDonalds changed their product? No! Has McDonalds changed the way they market their product? Yes! Because of their Muslim culture who is offended at eating pork, McDonalds has contextualized without compromising. reachingandteaching.org/ by David Sills.

In Galatians, Paul is confronting a similar issue. The Jews wanted to force their Jewish regulations on Gentiles. The Jews wanted to coerce Gentile believers to be circumcised according to their Old Testament Law and culture.

How Paul responded to this cultural pressure provides us with three principles for engaging our culture without watering down our gospel message.

1. We Do Not Alter Our Message to Engage our Culture.

George W. Peters identifies the problem with contextualizaton. There is a legitmate and nonlegitmate, that is, a biblical and liberal contextualization (David J. Hesselgrave & Edward Rommen. Contextualization: Meanings, Methods, and Models. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1989, x). The nonlegitmate and liberal contextualization changes the message of the gospel.

Paul used Titus as an example who was a Gentile believer that the Judaizers wanted circumcised. Paul refused to condone works of the Law as a means of salvation. Paul refused to change the content of his gospel message (Galatians 2:1-10).

David Sills also provides this example. Secular anthropologists see each culture as a separate entity with its own set of relative morals. If a culture believes in killing the second twin, then, it is not murder. This issue is relative with each culture. There are no absolutes according to the secular anthropologist. God, however, wrote an absolute when He commanded, “Thou shalt not kill.”

We do not change our message because it is politically incorrect to preach Jesus is the only way to heaven. Those who believe in Pluralism will call us intolerant of other religions.

Even among Evangelicals, according to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, 2007 US Religious Landscape Survey, only 36% believe their religion to be “the one, true faith that leads to eternal life.” This means that 64% of Evangelicals do not believe in exclusivity. This means culture has impacted the church and instead of the church impacting culture.

What about Jesus’ claim of being the only Son of God (John 10:30) and also the only way to Heaven in John 14:6: “I am the way, the truth, the life, no man comes unto the Father but by me.” In this arena, we are counter-cultural.

In Part 2, I will discuss the second principle for engaging our culutre without compromising our message.

Worship Wars: Worshiping How We Worship instead of Worshiping God

Posted: May 20, 2010 in Church Ministries, Pastoral Theology, The Church
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
0

GBC Sermon Audio – May 19 & 26, 2010

I heard this illustration from two different preachers on the controversy of church music and thought some of you would apprecate it and may want to file it away for preaching on Romans 14 and Christian Liberty. That is what I did. When I heard it the first time, I told the preacher I would give him $10 for that illustration. He graciously gave me the illustration at no charge.

An old farmer went to the city one weekend and attended the big city church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was. ”Well,” said the farmer, “it was good. They did something different, though. They sang praise choruses instead of hymns.”

“Praise choruses?” asked the wife. “What are those?”

“Oh, they’re okay . . . they’re sort of like hymns, only different,” the farmer said.

“Well, what’s the difference?” Asked his wife.

The farmer explained, “Well, it’s like this. If I were to say to you, ‘Martha, the cows are in the corn,’ that would be a hymn.

If, on the other hand, I were to say to you, “Martha, Martha, Martha, Oh Martha, Martha, Martha, the cows, the big cows, the brown cows, the black cows , the white cows, the COWS, the COWS, COWS, COWS, are the corn, corn, corn, they’re in the coooooorrrrrnnnn.” Then, I repeated it three times, that would be a praise chorus.

Wouldn’t you know it, that farmer’s little chuch had a visitor from the big city church that same Sunday. He went home to his wife and she asked him how it went.

He said, “Oh, it was okay,except they don’t sing choruses–they sing hymns.”

She asked, “What’s a hymn?”

He said, “Well, it’s like a chorus, only different?”

She said, “What do you mean?”

He explained, “Well, if I said to you, Martha, the cows are in the corn–but say it like this:

Oh Martha, dear, Martha hear the words of my mouth, Turn thou thy whole wondrous ear to this glorious truth;

For the way of the animals who can explain; there in their heads is no shadow of sense, Hearkenest they in God’s sun or his rain, Unless from the mild corn they are fenced;

Yea those cows in glad, rebellious delight, Have loosed their shackles, their warm pens eschew, Yea goaded by minions of darkness and night, They all my sweet corn are now destined to chew.

Martha, look to that bright day when earth is reborn, And I shall not see those cows in my corn.

That would be a hymn!

Today when you discuss worship you have to address “Worship Warfare.” Albert Mohler does in He is not Silent: “The subject of worship is now one of the most controversial issues in the local congregation” (page 23). The only part of his statement that I disagree with is the one word “now.” Worship warfare has been raging for centuries. It took Benjamin Keath (1640-1704) twenty years to persuade his Baptist congregation to sing hymns and not just Psalms. Even after twenty years, some of his members left and started another church so they could sing just Psalms.

Just Google books about “worship wars” and see how hot this topic is.

In our series on The Church we have studied pictures of the Church which showed us who we are as the Church which affects what we practice.

1. Pictures of the Church:

The Church is the Body of Christ who worships our Head so that He has the preeminence. The Church is Temple of the Holy Spirit. We worship the only true God as the temple. The Church is the Bride of Christ who adores her Bridegroom. We are the Priesthood who exercises our priestly function of the sacrifice of praise. The Church is the Flock of God who with David worships The Lord our Shepherd.

2. Practices of the Church (Acts 2:42-47)

Not all would agree that Acts 2:42-47 is the text for the model of church practices. Rick Warren states that the Great Commandment (Matthew 22:37-40) plus the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20) make a Great Church (The Purpose Driven Church, 102-103). The first local church described by Luke for us in Acts 2:42-47 shows us what a church looks like that obeys both the great commandment and the great commission. So there is no real contradiction.

A. Teaching: “They continued stedfastly in the apostle’s doctrine.” Teaching and preaching of God’s Word are first mentioned for emphasis. The first Christian ministry performed after the founding of the Church on the Day of Pentecost was preaching (Peter’s sermon). This was a statement.

B. Fellowship: “They continued stedfastly in … fellowship….all that believed were together, and had all things common….breaking bread.” Fellowship is not simply contact with another believer over a cup of coffee. Fellowship is more like discipleship. Robert Anderson mentions a church that disciplined a church member and forbad the other members from having any contact with that member. If a member saw the disciplined member in the grocery store that member was to turn and walk away. This church was confusing contact with fellowship (The Effective Pastor, Chicago: Moody, 1985, 332). Biblical fellowship is a deep involvement in another believer’s life in order to help him spiritually as the Philippians did with Paul at Thessalonica (Philippians 4:15-16).

C. Worship: “Fear came upon every soul….praising God.” John Hammett describes these two aspects of worship as reverent awe and joyful praise (Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches, 249). Traditional churches have to be careful not to go to seed on reverent awe and contemporary churches must be “take care that they not obscure God’s holiness. One of the earliest studies of Willow Creek found that 70 percent of the sermons emphasized God’s love, while only 7 percent dealt with God’s holiness….  Traditionalists need to guard against the opposite danger, that of joyless worship that does not actively engage worshipers in praise, but leaves them to sit in silence” (Hammett, 249).

D. Service: “and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” This is the outgrowth of worship. In Heaven, the result of our worshiping God and the Lamb will be that His “servants shall serve him” (Revelation 22:3).

E. Evangelism: “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” This is another by-product of worship.

Today there are “Worship Wars.”

1. War between contemporary music and traditional music. This is the battle between those who want reverence and others who want relevance in the worship service according to Ed Stetzer.

2. War between seeker sensitive or evangelism and glorifying God and edification of believers. On this point I must take sides with glorifying God and edification of believers and use Ephesians 4:11-12 as my bases. Evangelism, as we saw in Acts 2:42-47, will be the fruit.

3. War between experience oriented worship and God centered worship. David clearly advocated God centered worship in 1 Chronicles 16:29.

4. War between the regulative principle of worship (include in worship only what Scripture endorses) and the normative principle (include whatever is not prohibited in Scripture). Most churches use both principles to varying degrees. We must be regulative in regard to the pattern seen in Acts 2:42-47. But normative with parts of our worship not directly addressed in Scripture such as announcements, length and order of service,  sound equipment, technology, padded pews, and please don’t forget the nursery. Mark Driscoll shows both the strengths and weaknesses of both principles.

True Worship

John 4 is the worship chapter. Jesus pursues and converts a non-worshiper into a “true worshiper” (4:23). From this chapter we learn that true worship

1. Is Directed to God the Father (John 4:21-24). Jesus informs the Samaritan woman that worship is not limited to a time and place. Worship is a lifestyle according to Hebrews 13:15-16 that should take place “continually.” We don’t just worship one hour from 11:00 to 12:00 Sunday mornings. We worship every waking hour. We either worship God or ourselves and our pleasures and possessions. We either worship God or comment idolatry.

2. Is Directed to the Father through the Son (John 4:26). The Samaritan woman went from seeing Jesus as “a Jew” to “sir” to “a prophet” to “Christ.” Even Jesus said, “No man comes to the Father but by me.”

3. Is Directed to the Father through the Son in the Spirit (John 4:24).

A. “In Spirit” (The Spirit empowers the human spirit). The Samaritans worshiped in the spirit but not in truth. They associated with pagans and worshiped enthusiastically but shallowly. The Samaritans rejected all of the Old Testament but the Pentateuch. Jesus said to the Samaritan, “You know not what you worship” (4:22).

B. “In Truth” (The Spirit enables us to understand God’s Word). The Jews on the other hand worshiped in truth but not in spirit. The religious Jews believed all of the Old Testament was God’s Word but their heart was not into worship. Jesus said to the religious but unsaved Jews, “this people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.” They were straight as shot gun barrel and just as empty.

The divine method was demonstrated with Jesus and the Samaritan woman. He gave her the truth in 4:26 and she enthusiastically responded in 4:28. If our worship is Word driven we will both worship in spirit and in truth. We will like Daniel, after reading the Word of God in Jeremiah 25:11-12, and fall to our knees in prayer (Daniel 9:1-3). We will experience what Ezra enjoyed when he expositorally preached the Word in Nehemiah 8 and the people wept as they heard God’s word.

God centered worship is the solution to our “worship wars.” Worshiping God and not worshiping how we worship God is the remedy. Neither is a cease fire in our blended service acceptable in our worship wars. It is not enough to stop fighting the other side but only worship when “our songs” are sung. We need to come to church and worship God not how we worship. Come and pour out our praise to Him “in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (that sounds like variety of styles to me) and not focus on ourselves and our tastes only.

Week 5: The NEW Bible Institute on Ephesians: Stop Living Like Unbelievers:(Ephesians 4:25-32) Part 2

Posted: October 31, 2009 in Ephesians Class, Sermons
Tags: , ,
1

Week 5 Assignment: Read pages 181-191 in MacArthur and Eph 4:25-32 and comment.

In my last post we looked at where the old nature came from, the Fall of Adam, and, how the image of God is restored at conversion, which includes a new nature. Now we will consider the battle between the old and new natures and the defeat of the old so we no longer live like the unsaved. Not everyone believes there is a battle.

I love the story of Charles Spurgeon when he “was a speaker at a conference along with another man, who publicly proclaimed that Christians could reach a place of sinless perfection where they no longer struggled with sin or had any desire to sin because they were perfected in the love of God. The speaker went on to suggest modestly that he had realized this in his own life. Spurgeon said nothing, but the next morning, at breakfast time, he crept up behind the man and poured a jug of milk on his head. He quickly discovered that the man still had his sinful nature!” (Gary Inrig. Hearts of Iron, Feet of Clay. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979, page 158).

After Conversion

Just as the totally depraved nature of the unsaved “old man” in 4:17-19 produces a sinful lifestyle, so the converted “new man” with a new nature or renewed spirit produces a righteous and holy lifestyle in 4:25-32.

The new nature, however, by itself is not enough to overcome the sin nature. Paul asked “who (not “what”) shall deliver me from the body of this death” (Romans 7:24). The answer is the Holy Spirit that Paul clearly describes in Romans 8:1-4. The Holy Spirit has two ministries that enable us to overcome the old nature.

1. The Holy Spirit regenerates and places the new nature in the believer. In Titus 3:5, the Holy Spirit not only regenerates the lost and places a new nature in the believer but continues to renew. We received our old nature at our first birth; we receive our new nature at our second birth.

2. This ministry of the Holy Spirit to renew the new nature is what Paul prayed for in Ephesians 3:16. Having the “inner man” or new nature is not enough. The Holy Spirit must “strengthen” and work through the new nature.

     a) When the Holy Spirit energizes the new nature, Paul in Ephesians 3:17 said, Christ can “dwell in your hearts by faith.” No longer is the old nature like an unwanted quest taking over the owner’s house against the owner’s wishes. Now Christ, our permanent resident, enjoys fellowship with us.

     b) When the Holy Spirit energizes the new nature, we are no longer slaves to the old nature (Romans 6:6-17). We become slaves to Christ when we take three important steps in these verses. The first step is to “know” that our obligation to obey our former master has been put to death (Romans 6:6). Next, we must not only know but believe this truth (Romans 6:11). And lastly, because the old sinful master wants to recapture us, haul us back to the plantation and dominate our lives, we must yield the members of our bodies to the Holy Spirit who will enable us to overcome the old sinful nature. In our own strength we cannot defeat our old slave master.

     c) When the Holy Spirit energizes the new nature, with the armor of God (Ephesians 6:10-17), we defeat the old nature that is “warring against the believer’s mind” (Romans 7:23). We have the “helmet of salvation” for our minds, where the battle is won or lost, and “the Sword of the Spirit” for our temptations.

Paul in Ephesians 4:25-32 describes what the lifestyle of a Christian looks like in whom the Holy Spirit is strengthening the new nature. Paul chose five areas of the unregenerate’s life that the Holy Spirit energizes the new nature to overcome: Lying, Anger, Stealing, Corrupt Speech, and Bitterness. In these five areas, Christians do not live like the unsaved. In each area Paul follows a similar pattern: A negative command, a positive command, and a reason for the positive command.

1. Lying (4:25)

     a) Negative command: “Put away lying.” Habitual liars, unbelievers, will not go to heaven (Revelations 21:8).

     b) Positive command: “Speak truth.”

     c) Reason for the positive command: “For we are members one of another” in the Body of Christ. Paul has already challenged us to “speak the truth in love” for there to be unity in the Body of Christ. Because our “Head, Christ is truth” (Ephesians 4:15, 21), His body should and can be truthful when the Holy Spirit through our new nature conforms into His image.

2. Anger (4:26-27)

     a) Negative command: Don’t sin by being wrongfully angry. Because God can be angry at sin (Deut. 9:20) so can believers be righteously ticked. Believers, however, should not only be angry at sin in others, (Psalm 139:19-22), which is right but not enough. Even the Pharisees were hypocritically angry at sin in others (Matthew 23:24). Even the unsaved get angry at injustice in the world. Believers should get angry at sin in their lives (Psalm 139:23-24).

     b) Positive command: “Do not let the sun go down on your wrath.”

     c) Reason for the positive command. If anger, even righteous anger is prolonged, it may give the devil an opportunity to move us to take vengeance in our own hands (Romans 12:17-21).

3. Stealing (4:28)

     a) Negative command: “Steal no more.” “Grand larceny, petty theft, taking some of your dad’s money off the dresser, reneging on a debt, not paying fair wages, or pocketing what a clerk overpays in change are all stealing. There is simply no end to ways we can steal, and whatever the ways are and whatever the chance for being caught, stealing is sin and has no part in the new walk of the new man in Christ” (MacArthur. Ephesians, page 186).

     b) Positive command: “Labor” in God honoring work. There is dignity in hard work (Exodus 20:8-11).

     c) Reason for the positive command: “That he may have to give to him that needs.” Instead of selfishly stealing, work hard so you can share unselfishly with others. Paul had practiced at Ephesus what he was now preaching to the Ephesians (Acts 20:33-35).

4. Corrupt Speech (4:29-30)

    a) Negative command: “Let no corrupt or unwholesome word proceed out of your mouth.” “Corrupt” means rotten as in rotten fruit in Matthew 7:17-18. “Unwholesome language should be as repulsive to us as a rotten apple or a spoiled piece of meat. Off-color jokes, profanity, dirty stories, vulgarity, double entendre, and every other form of corrupt talk should never cross our lips” (MacArthur. Ephesians, page 187).

    b) Positive command: We may not be guilty of the rotten language just mentioned but as Christians are our daily conversations “edifying”? Are the people we talk to and about built up or torn down?

    c) Reason for the positive command: “That it may minister grace to the hearers and grieve not the Holy Spirit.” When we tell people the truth in love, even if it is a rebuke of their sin, grace or spiritual strength can be ministered to them if they accept our words. Jesus spoke “gracious words” in Luke 4:22 to his enemies who turned on Him; nevertheless He spoke graciously. Not only should our words as Christians strengthen others but not grieve the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not only deity but personality with feelings.

5. Bitterness (4:31-32)

    a) Negative command: “Let all bitterness…. be put away.” These sins from bad interpersonal relationships begin internally with bitterness and anger and if not confessed become outward outbursts. Like a boiling pot of water which spills out all over the kitchen doing all kinds of damage. There are some people if you accidently bump them you will get scalded.

    b) Positive command: “And be kind one to another tenderhearted, forgiving one another.” Just as God is unconditionally kind to us (Luke 6:35b), tenderhearted or compassionate and forgiving of us so should we be to others who have hurt and disappointed and even betrayed us. For all of these offences have we committed against God.

    c) Reason for the positive command: “Even as God in Christ has forgiven you.” God has forgiven us unconditionally; We should forgive without first exacting a pound of flesh. God has forgiven us eternally. Therefore, we should forgive and not hold grudges.  God has forgiven us completely. Thank God, He is not keeping records. “Love doesn’t keep records” in 1 Corinthians 13:5. If we keep bringing up someone’s fault against us then we have not forgiven. The unsaved get even. Believers forgive like our Savior who on the cross prayed for His enemies, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” Is there someone for whom you need to pray this prayer and act like Christ rather than getting even like unbelievers?

We began this sermon in part one with the results of Stetzer’s research on how to reach the unchurched young adults from 20-29 years old. The young adults rightly demand authenticity which our text is all about. That spoke to my heart. Stetzer also addressed the SBC and further challenged us on how to reach our culture. I am including the Youtube here.

Week 3: The NEW Bible Institute on Ephesians, Part 3 “God’s Call to The Ministry Verses God’s Call to Ministry”

Posted: October 16, 2009 in Ephesians Class, Homiletics/Preaching, Sermons
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

Week 3 Assignment: Ephesians 3:1-13.

In his book, So Beautiful, Leonard Sweet slams God called pastors, ordination, and any distinction between clergy and laity calling such ideas “heresy.”

Sweet writes: Presbyterian Robert T. Henderson and Southern Baptist Ed Stetzer are calling loudly for the de-clergification of the church. How “clergified” is your church? If the distinctions of “clergy” and “laity” are not biblical, where should our emphasis be—abolishing the clergy and making all of them ministers, or abolishing the laity and making all of us ministers?

The heresy of clerisy (only priests are ministers) is killing the church. I heard the story of a member of the church approaching their pastor and telling him that they had been called into full-time ministry. The pastor did not respond in the manner they were expecting when he said, “Oh, I thought you were a Christian.”

This set the member back a bit. He answered that of course he was a Christian. Then the pastor said, “Then, too late…” by which he meant that when we became disciples of Jesus, we accepted the call into full-time ministry.

So much of the time we write a check and think we have done our part. Or, if we are really trying to be spiritual, we may go on a mission project for a few days a year. In reality Christ turns us into “Mission 365,” as my friend Tom Ingram calls it. We are in mission in the car, in mission at the grocery store, in mission at Starbucks, in mission on Twitter.

It is time to abolish the laity and make everyone clergy, “minister.” Or maybe we should abolish the clergy and make everyone laity, “ministers” (Leonard Sweet. SO BEAUTIFUL. Colorado Springs, David C. Cook, 2009, pages 5, 7).

Ed Stetzer defines clergification: This is the belief that the professionals carry out the real work of the church, and everyone else simply lends a hand here and there and says we should reject the “called to the ministry” for “called to ministry.”

I agree that there are abuses of vocational ministries as Stetzer rightly exposes. But that does not mean we abandon what is taught in Scripture? There is a special call of God to men to preach His Word. But, there is also a general call to all believers to serve (Ephesians 4:1). This attitude and view of Leonard Sweet is in stark contrast to some of the most influential preachers and teachers of preachers of the past and present.

Homilitican Lloyd Perry (Warren Wiersbe’s teacher): “The primary requirement for preaching is a divine call to preach” (A Manual for Biblical Preaching, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965, page 4).

Pastor W.H. Griffith Thomas: “This is the Divine Call, and it is the foundation of all else” (Ministerial Life and Work, Chicago: The Institute Colportage Association, 1927, page 27).

Pastor and author on preaching Martin Lloyd-Jones: “Nothing but this overwhelming sense of being called and of compulsion should ever lead anyone to preach” (Preaching and Preachers, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972, page 107).

Homilitican John Broadus: “The preacher should be a person with a call from God. Ministers are called as professionals, but they should never be persons with just a profession” (On the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, ed. Vernon C. Stanfield, 4th ed., rev. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1979, page 13).

Charles Spurgeon: “It is a fearful calamity to a man to miss his calling” (Lectures to My Students, Grand Rapids: Associate Publisher and Authors, n.d., page 22).

G. Campbell Morgan: “The only men who can really enter this ministry are those whom the Lord chooses, calls, and equips, by the bestowment of gifts according to the wisdom of His will” (The Ministry of the Word, New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1919, page 127).

John MacArthur: “The gospel is spread by men whom God calls to proclaim it” (Ephesians. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1986, page 93).

The Call to The Ministry and The Call to Ministry is not Either/Or but Both/And.

God called Paul to preach the truths in Ephesians 3:1-6 as he states in 3:7: “I was made a minister.” This historically happened in Acts 26:14-18.

1. What are the Evidences of God’s Call to the Ministry?

A. A God given desire to preach.

“The primary way this intuitive understanding of the call is manifested according to the New Testament is a desire for the ministry (I Timothy 3:1), caused by God (Philippians 2:12-13), and growing into a virtually irresistible constraint (1 Corinthians 9:16)” (Stephen J. Hankins. The Call to the Christian Ministry. Biblical Viewpoint: Unusual Press: Bob Jones University, n.d. page 88). When men would come to Spurgeon who were struggling with the call to the ministry of preaching and pastoring he is credited with saying, “If you can do anything else and be happy, then do it.”

God uses desires to lead all believers into His will as Psalm 37:4 indicates: “Delight yourself in the LORD; and he shall give you the desires of your heart.” Again, it is not either/or but both/and. God calls some men specifically to preach through a desire for His will and God leads other believers through desire into other ministries.

B. A God given ability.

“God never calls without equipping, and the very fact of equipment proves the call (Ephesians 4:11)” wrote W. H. Griffith Thomas (page 94). Paul refers to this reality in his life in Ephesians 3:7. Paul was made a minister by God to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ, in other words, the ministry of preaching for Paul was not a career choice. In the same verse, Paul informs us that the God who called him equipped him with “the effectual working of His power.”

C. A God given recognition.

“The man who thinks he is called to the ministry must also meet, to a blameless degree, the qualifications presented by Paul in formal lists in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9… A man cannot lead people who refuse to follow him, nor can he provide spiritual food and protection for those who do not accept him as a shepherd” (Hankins, page 89). The local church at Antioch recognized that the Holy Spirit had called Barnabas and Paul to plant churches, laid hands on them, and sent them out as the church’s first missionaries (Acts 13:1-3).

2. What are the Characteristics of God’s Call to the Ministry?

 A. Service: “Whereof I was made a minister.”

The word “minister” “is used of a ‘waiter’ at a wedding feast” (John 2:5, 9) (Harold W. Hoehner. Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002, 449). The preacher serves God’s people God’s Word. I worked my way through graduate school by serving as a waiter at a fish camp. The customers would complain to me if their fish was not good.  I felt like saying, “I did not gig your founder, nor did I cook it, I only served it. Why are you complaining to me?” The same is true sometimes with serving God’s people God’s Word. They complain to us about the food. It is our job to faithfully serve God’s Word and leave the results to God.

B. God’s power: “According to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power” (Ephesians 3:7b).

It is true that all believers have this power, as Paul made clear in his first Prison Epistle prayer (1:19) and therefore all believers should be experiencing this equipment in ministry in and through their local church. Every believer, including the pastor, has the omnipotence of God behind his call to serve. Paul made a great statement on preaching in 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 when he said he did not preach with eloquence or erudition, but “in demonstration of the Spirit and of power that your faith should not stanD in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.”

C. Humility: “Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given.”

Paul felt undeserving of salvation (1 Timothy 1:11-15) and the ministry (Ephesians 3:8) “Because,” as Paul made clear in 1 Corinthians 15:9, “I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.” God help us preachers to possess the humble attitude of Paul even when we are criticized for serving God’s Word. In Philippians 1:14-18, instead of retaliating against those who attacked him, Paul rejoiced that souls were saved under their ministry. Someone asked Spurgeon: “How can we reconcile the Calvinists and the Arminians?” Spurgeon replied, “You don’t have to reconcile brothers.” We need this attitude of humility today.

A must read for all believers, including pastors, is C. J. Mahaney’s Humility: True Greatness. Mahaney starts chapter one, “The Promise of Humility” by referring to Jim Collins’ bestseller, Good to Great. The result of Collins researching 11 corporations which had become great was that each corporation’s CEO was “quiet, humble, modest, reserved, shy, gracious, mild-mannered, self-effacing, understated, did not believe his own clippings” and thus respected by their employees.

Humility not only attracts the attention of the world but, vastly more importantly, God according to Isaiah 66:2, “This is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my Word.” In addition to attracting God’s attention, humility  moves God to fulfill the promise of humility which is found in James 4:6, “God…gives grace to the humble.” As I read this chapter, I am asking myself, “Is God looking with pleasure on my life because of my humility?” “Am I experiencing His grace, His spiritual strength, in my life and ministry because of my contriteness?”

3. What are the Ministries of the God Called?

A. For Paul: “To make all men to see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:7).

B. For All Preachers.

It is our ministry to preach “the unsearchable riches of Christ to make men see what is the fellowship of the mystery which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God.” “Paul is saying in effect, ‘I am not only called in the vertical area to preach the unfathomable riches of Christ, but in the horizontal area to teach about the administration, the stewardship of dispensation, of the mystery of the church age’” (MacArthur, page 95). We must preach so men can be vertically related to Christ and once that is true they will be horizontally right with one another in unity. Translated, we preach to win men to Christ or as Paul will later say to Timothy, “Do the work of an evangelist.” Then we preach to win them to each other in unity and ministry.

4. What are The Results of God’s Call to the Ministry?

A. God’s wisdom will be displayed in the unity of the local church (Ephesians 3:10-11).

Even angels, “principalities and powers in heavenly places” (3:10), did not know about the church in the Old Testament. Since angels were created to praise God (Psalm 148:1-5) our unity in the local church can give angels cause to praise the Lord. While God revealed the mystery of the church to Paul and others, God did not reveal that mystery to angels. Angels must learn about this mystery by observing our unity in our local church.

God planned the church from eternity past, Christ accomplished its unity by His death on the cross (3:11) when He tore down the middle wall of partition, but the local church must display its unity. What do angels see, for they are watching (1 Corinthians 4:9; 11:10), as they observe our local church? Unity or division!

B. Believers’ responsibility (Ephesians 3:12-13).

Jews and Gentiles, “we,” for the first time, can now in unity access God together. In Acts 2, the church was in “one accord” and look what happened. The church in Acts 2 experienced for the first time what God the Father planned, what Christ accomplished on the cross, and what the Holy Spirit birthed. Unity can be a powerful weapon in God’s hands. Warren W. Wiersbe has a little book on the prayers in the Book of Acts entitled, “Something Happens When the Church Prays.” Something also happens when the Church preaches, as Peter did in Acts 2 and experiences the results of this God called ministry.

Justin Taylor tells how God called John Piper to the ministry that puts a well-known personal face on this lesson. His post is entitled: 30 Years Ago Today: How God Called John Piper to Become a Pastor.

Older Entries