Dear Friends of the Ministry,
An exciting documentary titled Walking the Bible has been produced for PBS television by TMC Entertainment. This three-hour special is full of compelling high-definition film that was shot in ten countries on three continents, tracing the stories of the Old Testament. Dr. John MacArthur has sent his endorsement, with the following statement:
"The Bible describes the work of God as He spoke and acted through real people in real places in real time. Walking the Bible brings that truth to life by taking you to the actual lands where the people of God lived out their faith. You'll come away with a greater appreciation for the culture and geography of Bible times after you watch this series."
Walking the Bible will air on three consecutive Wednesday nights after the first of the year: January 4, 11, and 18 at 8:00 p.m. local time everywhere.
PBS says that January is their highest-rated month in terms of viewership, and, given that this will be broadcast on all 353 PBS affiliates nationwide, a potential audience of millions will be exposed to the Bible - perhaps in a way like never before. I hope you will pray for the success of this broadcast and that you'll tell others about it.
Have a blessed Christmas,
Pat Rotisky
Personal Secretary to John MacArthur
Monday, December 19, 2005
Monday, December 12, 2005
Megachurch madness
Article taken from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/09/national/09church.html?pagewanted=2&emc=eta1
When Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off
Some of the nation's most prominent megachurches have decided not to hold worship services on the Sunday that coincides with Christmas Day, a move that is generating controversy among evangelical Christians at a time when many conservative groups are battling to "put the Christ back in Christmas."
Megachurch leaders say that the decision is in keeping with their innovative and "family friendly" approach and that they are compensating in other ways. Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., always a pacesetter among megachurches, is handing out a DVD it produced for the occasion that features a heartwarming contemporary Christmas tale.
"What we're encouraging people to do is take that DVD and in the comfort of their living room, with friends and family, pop it into the player and hopefully hear a different and more personal and maybe more intimate Christmas message, that God is with us wherever we are," said Cally Parkinson, communications director at Willow Creek, which draws 20,000 people on a typical Sunday.
Megachurches have long been criticized for offering "theology lite," but some critics say that this time the churches have gone too far in the quest to make Christianity accessible to spiritual seekers.
"I see this in many ways as a capitulation to narcissism, the self-centered, me-first, I'm going to put me and my immediate family first agenda of the larger culture," said Ben Witherington III, professor of New Testament interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky. "If Christianity is an evangelistic religion, then what kind of message is this sending to the larger culture - that worship is an optional extra?"
John D. Witvliet, director of the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship at Calvin College, asked: "What about the people in society without strong family connections? The elderly, single people a long distance from family, or people who are simply lonely and for whom church and prayers would be a significant part of their day?"
The uproar is not only over closing the churches on Christmas Day, because some evangelical churches large and small have done that in recent years and made Christmas Eve the big draw, without attracting much criticism.
What some consider the deeper affront is in canceling services on a Sunday, which most Christian churches consider the Lord's Day, when communal worship is an obligation. The last time Christmas fell on a Sunday was in 1994. Some of these same megachurches remained open them, they say, but found attendance sparse.
Since then, the perennial culture wars over the secularization of Christmas have intensified, and this year the scuffles are especially lively. Conservative Christian groups are boycotting stores that fail to mention "Christmas" in their holiday greetings or advertising campaigns. Schools are being pressured to refer to the December vacation as "Christmas break." Even the White House came under attack this week for sending out cards with best wishes for the "holiday season."
When the office of Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia sent out a press release last Friday announcing plans for a "holiday tree" lighting, a half-hour later it sent out another saying, "It is in fact a Christmas tree."
For years, it has been an open secret that many mainline Protestant churches are half empty - or worse - on Christmas Day. The churches' emphasis has been instead on the days leading up to Christmas, with Christmas Eve attracting the most worshipers. Some of the megachurches closing on Christmas this year have increased the number of services in the days before.
But for the vast majority of the other churches, closing down on Christmas Sunday would be unthinkable.
"I can't even imagine not observing Christmas in an Episcopal church," said Robert Williams, a spokesman for the Episcopal Church USA. "The only thing I could think of would be a summer chapel that might be shut down anyway."
In many Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, known for their rich liturgical traditions, Christmas Day attracts far more worshippers than an average Sunday. Grown children return with their parents to the parishes they belonged to when they were young.
From the Catholic perspective, the whole purpose of the holiday is to celebrate it as a religious holiday in the company of the community, and for Catholics that means at Mass," said Robert J. Miller, director of research and planning in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Canceling worship on Christmas Day appears to be predominantly a megachurch phenomenon, sociologists of religion say.
"This attachment to a particular day on the calendar is just not something that megachurches have been known for," Nancy Ammerman, a sociologist of religion at Boston University, said. "They're known for being flexible and creative, and not for taking these traditions, seasons, dates and symbols really seriously."
At least eight megachurches have canceled their Christmas services. They are only a fraction of the 1,200 or so in the country, but they are influential, Scott Thumma, a sociologist of religion at Hartford Seminary, said. The trend has been reported in The Lexington Herald-Leader and in other newspapers.
Besides Willow Creek, the churches include Southland Christian Church in Nicholasville, Ky.; Crossroads Christian Church in Lexington, Ky.; Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Tex.; Redemption World Outreach Center in Greenville, S.C.; North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Ga.; First Baptist in Atlanta; and Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Mich.
Many other megachurches that are staying open on Christmas Day are holding fewer services than they would on a typical Sunday. New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, in Lithonia, Ga., with about 25,000 members, will hold only one of its usual two services this Christmas Day.
Bishop Eddie L. Long, the senior pastor, said that his church was "always promoting family," and that many members of his congregation were transplants to the Atlanta area who traveled far away to be with their families on Christmas.
"We're encouraging our members to do a family worship," Bishop Long said. "They could wake up and read Scripture and pray and sometimes sing a song, and go over the true meaning of what Christmas is, before opening up their gifts. It keeps them together and not running off to get dressed up to go off to church."
His church offers streaming video of the Sunday service, and Bishop Long said he expected a spike in viewers this Christmas. "They have an option if they want to join their family around the computer and worship with us," he said.
Staff members at Willow Creek said they had had few complaints from members about the church closing on Christmas. Said the Rev. Mark Ashton, whose title is pastor of spiritual discovery: "We've always been a church that's been on the edge of innovation. We've been willing to try and experiment, so this is another one of those innovations."
The real question is not why churches are skipping Christmas, but why individual Christians are skipping church on the second holiest day on the Christian calendar next to Easter, said Mr. Thumma.
"I think these critics who decry the megachurches should really be aiming their barbs at individual Christians who are willing to stay at home around the Christmas tree instead of coming and giving at least part of that day to the meaning of the holiday," he said. "They should be facing up to the reality of that."
When Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off
Some of the nation's most prominent megachurches have decided not to hold worship services on the Sunday that coincides with Christmas Day, a move that is generating controversy among evangelical Christians at a time when many conservative groups are battling to "put the Christ back in Christmas."
Megachurch leaders say that the decision is in keeping with their innovative and "family friendly" approach and that they are compensating in other ways. Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., always a pacesetter among megachurches, is handing out a DVD it produced for the occasion that features a heartwarming contemporary Christmas tale.
"What we're encouraging people to do is take that DVD and in the comfort of their living room, with friends and family, pop it into the player and hopefully hear a different and more personal and maybe more intimate Christmas message, that God is with us wherever we are," said Cally Parkinson, communications director at Willow Creek, which draws 20,000 people on a typical Sunday.
Megachurches have long been criticized for offering "theology lite," but some critics say that this time the churches have gone too far in the quest to make Christianity accessible to spiritual seekers.
"I see this in many ways as a capitulation to narcissism, the self-centered, me-first, I'm going to put me and my immediate family first agenda of the larger culture," said Ben Witherington III, professor of New Testament interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Ky. "If Christianity is an evangelistic religion, then what kind of message is this sending to the larger culture - that worship is an optional extra?"
John D. Witvliet, director of the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship at Calvin College, asked: "What about the people in society without strong family connections? The elderly, single people a long distance from family, or people who are simply lonely and for whom church and prayers would be a significant part of their day?"
The uproar is not only over closing the churches on Christmas Day, because some evangelical churches large and small have done that in recent years and made Christmas Eve the big draw, without attracting much criticism.
What some consider the deeper affront is in canceling services on a Sunday, which most Christian churches consider the Lord's Day, when communal worship is an obligation. The last time Christmas fell on a Sunday was in 1994. Some of these same megachurches remained open them, they say, but found attendance sparse.
Since then, the perennial culture wars over the secularization of Christmas have intensified, and this year the scuffles are especially lively. Conservative Christian groups are boycotting stores that fail to mention "Christmas" in their holiday greetings or advertising campaigns. Schools are being pressured to refer to the December vacation as "Christmas break." Even the White House came under attack this week for sending out cards with best wishes for the "holiday season."
When the office of Gov. Sonny Perdue of Georgia sent out a press release last Friday announcing plans for a "holiday tree" lighting, a half-hour later it sent out another saying, "It is in fact a Christmas tree."
For years, it has been an open secret that many mainline Protestant churches are half empty - or worse - on Christmas Day. The churches' emphasis has been instead on the days leading up to Christmas, with Christmas Eve attracting the most worshipers. Some of the megachurches closing on Christmas this year have increased the number of services in the days before.
But for the vast majority of the other churches, closing down on Christmas Sunday would be unthinkable.
"I can't even imagine not observing Christmas in an Episcopal church," said Robert Williams, a spokesman for the Episcopal Church USA. "The only thing I could think of would be a summer chapel that might be shut down anyway."
In many Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, known for their rich liturgical traditions, Christmas Day attracts far more worshippers than an average Sunday. Grown children return with their parents to the parishes they belonged to when they were young.
From the Catholic perspective, the whole purpose of the holiday is to celebrate it as a religious holiday in the company of the community, and for Catholics that means at Mass," said Robert J. Miller, director of research and planning in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Canceling worship on Christmas Day appears to be predominantly a megachurch phenomenon, sociologists of religion say.
"This attachment to a particular day on the calendar is just not something that megachurches have been known for," Nancy Ammerman, a sociologist of religion at Boston University, said. "They're known for being flexible and creative, and not for taking these traditions, seasons, dates and symbols really seriously."
At least eight megachurches have canceled their Christmas services. They are only a fraction of the 1,200 or so in the country, but they are influential, Scott Thumma, a sociologist of religion at Hartford Seminary, said. The trend has been reported in The Lexington Herald-Leader and in other newspapers.
Besides Willow Creek, the churches include Southland Christian Church in Nicholasville, Ky.; Crossroads Christian Church in Lexington, Ky.; Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Tex.; Redemption World Outreach Center in Greenville, S.C.; North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Ga.; First Baptist in Atlanta; and Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Mich.
Many other megachurches that are staying open on Christmas Day are holding fewer services than they would on a typical Sunday. New Birth Missionary Baptist Church, in Lithonia, Ga., with about 25,000 members, will hold only one of its usual two services this Christmas Day.
Bishop Eddie L. Long, the senior pastor, said that his church was "always promoting family," and that many members of his congregation were transplants to the Atlanta area who traveled far away to be with their families on Christmas.
"We're encouraging our members to do a family worship," Bishop Long said. "They could wake up and read Scripture and pray and sometimes sing a song, and go over the true meaning of what Christmas is, before opening up their gifts. It keeps them together and not running off to get dressed up to go off to church."
His church offers streaming video of the Sunday service, and Bishop Long said he expected a spike in viewers this Christmas. "They have an option if they want to join their family around the computer and worship with us," he said.
Staff members at Willow Creek said they had had few complaints from members about the church closing on Christmas. Said the Rev. Mark Ashton, whose title is pastor of spiritual discovery: "We've always been a church that's been on the edge of innovation. We've been willing to try and experiment, so this is another one of those innovations."
The real question is not why churches are skipping Christmas, but why individual Christians are skipping church on the second holiest day on the Christian calendar next to Easter, said Mr. Thumma.
"I think these critics who decry the megachurches should really be aiming their barbs at individual Christians who are willing to stay at home around the Christmas tree instead of coming and giving at least part of that day to the meaning of the holiday," he said. "They should be facing up to the reality of that."
www.Abort73.com
Friends,
Prepare to weep over this information/visual images/reality. America the beautiful, land of the free and home of the brave (or something like that)
Please check out this site
www.Abort73.com
Prepare to weep over this information/visual images/reality. America the beautiful, land of the free and home of the brave (or something like that)
Please check out this site
www.Abort73.com
No Church! Why? It's CHRISTmas!?!
Grace Community Church and Northview Church (here in Indy) have recently stated they will not be having church Christmas Sunday.
Please Read what Tom Ascol had to say about this trend ( from http://www.founders.org/blog/ )
What Christmas Church Closings Indicate
What I find even more disturbing than churches actually cancelling their Lord's Day services are the reasons that are being given to support their decisions. So far, what I have read or heard (from both the internet and our local media) as justifications for shutting down Christian churches on Sunday, December 25 can be grouped into several categories.
Convenience
The kind of production that Sunday services require in some larger churches is simply too difficult and involved to ask the staff and volunteers to do that on a holiday as important as Christmas. If it did not incovenience so many people to hold Lord's Day services, then, according to some of the reasons being given, some churches would opt to stay open on Christmas.
Pragmatism
Some church leaders simply faced the facts that their members are simply going to stay home that day, regardless of what is scheduled with the church. A local Christian radio station manager for WAY-FM made it clear this morning that he was going to spend the day at home with his family, no matter what. He even interviewed his United Methodist pastor (who plans to hold a scaled down service on that Sunday) as a way of showing that his plans should not be "judged" by anyone who disagreed with him. Another pastor in our area said that when polling his congregation it became apparent that many simply planned to skip church that day. So instead of facing the embarassing reality of the low level of commitment that exists in the church, he decided to cancel it.
Just desserts
Another line of reasoning sounds something like the old McDonald's commercial: "You deserve a break today..." People work so hard for 364 days a year (or 51 Sundays a year, as a variant rationale goes) that they deserve not to have to go to church on December 25. Those who have made this case sound like worshiping with God's people is such a pain and burden that no one should begrudge getting out from under that load on a day as special as Christmas. One pastor, commenting on Saddleback's planned shutdown indicated that since that church does so much good, no one should question their decision to take a Sunday off. After all, even Walmart shuts down on Christmas, why shouldn't a church have the same prerogative?
Family values
Familes ought to be together. There are so many pressures that pull them apart, especially during the Christmas season, that it is the least that the church can do to shut down on the Lord's Day in order to promote family togetherness. This is actually viewed as a noble decision, rooted in love for families.
Evangelism
One church even argued that since very few unconverted people are expected to attend on that Sunday, it would not be cost-effective to hold services that day. The reasoning goes like this: since the church's main responsibility is to reach lost people, if they will not come on Christmas, then we will not waste our time and energy at putting on a service.
I am sure that there are other stated reasons and I am sure that many who have offered variations of those I have mentioned above would like to elaborate or refine their comments. Be that as it may, the obvious, glaring omission in all of these excuses is any appeal to the Word of God. It is as if the decision whether or not a church should gather on the Lord's Day is purely subjective. I have mentioned this before but it applies again here--wouldn't it be helpful if someone along the way stopped and asked the question, "Does God have an opinion on this?"
Does God care if a church cancels its worship service on the Lord's Day because it falls on December 25? If He does, then shouldn't we listen to it and heed it? If He doesn't, then let those who advocate canceling Lord's Day services say so plainly. They should say something like this: "We are canceling Lord's Day worship services and God doesn't care one way or the other. The Bible has nothing to say about this. We are completely free to do this."
The kind of reasoning that is coming out in defense of church closings has more in common with the world and its ways than it does with the Bible. And this is further evidence of how far American evangelicalism has fallen away from basic, biblical Christianity. At some point, like Machen did in the early 2oth century with liberalism, we are going to be forced to admit that what passes under the banner of evangelicalism simply is not Christian, no matter how many Christian trappings are retained.
Our only hope is reformation and revival.
Please Read what Tom Ascol had to say about this trend ( from http://www.founders.org/blog/ )
What Christmas Church Closings Indicate
What I find even more disturbing than churches actually cancelling their Lord's Day services are the reasons that are being given to support their decisions. So far, what I have read or heard (from both the internet and our local media) as justifications for shutting down Christian churches on Sunday, December 25 can be grouped into several categories.
Convenience
The kind of production that Sunday services require in some larger churches is simply too difficult and involved to ask the staff and volunteers to do that on a holiday as important as Christmas. If it did not incovenience so many people to hold Lord's Day services, then, according to some of the reasons being given, some churches would opt to stay open on Christmas.
Pragmatism
Some church leaders simply faced the facts that their members are simply going to stay home that day, regardless of what is scheduled with the church. A local Christian radio station manager for WAY-FM made it clear this morning that he was going to spend the day at home with his family, no matter what. He even interviewed his United Methodist pastor (who plans to hold a scaled down service on that Sunday) as a way of showing that his plans should not be "judged" by anyone who disagreed with him. Another pastor in our area said that when polling his congregation it became apparent that many simply planned to skip church that day. So instead of facing the embarassing reality of the low level of commitment that exists in the church, he decided to cancel it.
Just desserts
Another line of reasoning sounds something like the old McDonald's commercial: "You deserve a break today..." People work so hard for 364 days a year (or 51 Sundays a year, as a variant rationale goes) that they deserve not to have to go to church on December 25. Those who have made this case sound like worshiping with God's people is such a pain and burden that no one should begrudge getting out from under that load on a day as special as Christmas. One pastor, commenting on Saddleback's planned shutdown indicated that since that church does so much good, no one should question their decision to take a Sunday off. After all, even Walmart shuts down on Christmas, why shouldn't a church have the same prerogative?
Family values
Familes ought to be together. There are so many pressures that pull them apart, especially during the Christmas season, that it is the least that the church can do to shut down on the Lord's Day in order to promote family togetherness. This is actually viewed as a noble decision, rooted in love for families.
Evangelism
One church even argued that since very few unconverted people are expected to attend on that Sunday, it would not be cost-effective to hold services that day. The reasoning goes like this: since the church's main responsibility is to reach lost people, if they will not come on Christmas, then we will not waste our time and energy at putting on a service.
I am sure that there are other stated reasons and I am sure that many who have offered variations of those I have mentioned above would like to elaborate or refine their comments. Be that as it may, the obvious, glaring omission in all of these excuses is any appeal to the Word of God. It is as if the decision whether or not a church should gather on the Lord's Day is purely subjective. I have mentioned this before but it applies again here--wouldn't it be helpful if someone along the way stopped and asked the question, "Does God have an opinion on this?"
Does God care if a church cancels its worship service on the Lord's Day because it falls on December 25? If He does, then shouldn't we listen to it and heed it? If He doesn't, then let those who advocate canceling Lord's Day services say so plainly. They should say something like this: "We are canceling Lord's Day worship services and God doesn't care one way or the other. The Bible has nothing to say about this. We are completely free to do this."
The kind of reasoning that is coming out in defense of church closings has more in common with the world and its ways than it does with the Bible. And this is further evidence of how far American evangelicalism has fallen away from basic, biblical Christianity. At some point, like Machen did in the early 2oth century with liberalism, we are going to be forced to admit that what passes under the banner of evangelicalism simply is not Christian, no matter how many Christian trappings are retained.
Our only hope is reformation and revival.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Doctrine is practical by John MacArthur
Doctrine Is Practical
by John MacArthur
from http://www.phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/
I have in my library a book by the spiritual father of a quasi-Christian cult. He argues that doctrinal statements, systematic theology and propositional truth claims are contrary to the spirit of Jesus' ministry.
That seemed a rather bizarre notion when I first heard it years ago. But the belief that Christ is against doctrine is a notion I seem to be encountering with increasing frequency.
No idea could be much further from the truth. The word doctrine simply means "teaching." And it's ludicrous to say that Christ is anti-teaching. The central imperative of His Great Commission is the command to teach (Matthew 28:18-20).
Yet there's no shortage of church-growth experts, professional pollsters, and even seminary professors nowadays who are cautioning young pastors that doctrine is too divisive, too threatening, too heady and theoretical—and therefore simply impractical.
Impractical? I agree that practical application is vital. I don't want to minimize its importance. But if there is a deficiency in preaching today, it is that there's too much relational, pseudo-psychological, and thinly life-related content, and not enough emphasis on sound doctrine.
Moreover, the distinction between doctrinal and practical truth is completely artificial; doctrine is practical. In fact, nothing is more practical than sound doctrine, because there's ultimately no basis for godly behavior apart from the truth of God's Word.
Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations mean little if they are divorced from divine principle. Before the preacher asks anyone to perform a certain duty, he must first deal with doctrine. He must develop his message around theological themes and draw out the principles of the texts. Then the truth can be applied.
Romans provides the clearest example. Paul doesn't give any exhortation until he has given eleven chapters of theology.
He scales incredible heights of truth, culminating in 11:33-36, where he says, "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given Him that it might be paid back to Him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen."
Then in chapter 12, he turns immediately to the practical consequences of the doctrine of the first 11 chapters. No passage in Scripture captures the Christian's responsibility in the face of truth more clearly than Romans 12:1-2. Resting on eleven chapters of profound doctrine, Paul calls each believer to a supreme act of spiritual worship—giving oneself as a living sacrifice.
So doctrine gives rise to devotion to Christ. What could be more practical? And the remainder of the book of Romans goes on to explain still more practical outworkings of one's dedication to Christ.
Paul follows the same pattern in Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1 Thessalonians. The doctrinal message comes first. Upon that foundation he builds the practical application, making the logical connection with the word therefore (Romans 12:1; Galatians 5:1; Ephesians 4:1; Philippians 2:1) or then (Colossians 3:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:1).
So we have imposed an artificial meaning on the word doctrine. We've made it something abstract and threatening, unrelated to daily living. That has brought about the disastrous idea that preaching and teaching are unrelated to living.
The scriptural concept of doctrine includes the entire message of the gospel—its teaching about God, salvation, sin, and righteousness. Those concepts are so tightly bound to daily living that the first-century mind did not see them as something separate from practical truth.
The New Testament church was founded on a solid base of doctrine. First Timothy 3:16 contains what many expositors believe is an early church hymn: "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." There, in capsule form, is the basis of all Christian teaching. Without that, no practical application matters.
The next few verses of 1 Timothy describe what happens when men depart from the basis of biblical truth: "Some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth" (4:1-3).
In other words, lying, hypocrisy, a dulled conscience, and false religious practices all have root in wrong doctrine.
No ministry activity is more important than rightly understanding and clearly proclaiming sound doctrine. In 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, Paul commissions two young men to the ministry. His central theme is the importance of adhering to sound doctrine.
Paul charged Timothy: "In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following" (1 Tim. 4:6). "Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching," Paul adds, "persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you" (v. 16).
Titus 2:10 says we "adorn [or honor] the doctrine of God" by how we live. When it comes to affirming sound doctrine, what we do carries far more significance than what we say. That's why it's disastrous when a pastor, seminary professor, or any kind of Christian leader fails morally. The message he proclaims is that his doctrine is unrelated to life. And for those whose lives he has touched, doctrine becomes merely an intellectual exercise.
True doctrine transforms behavior as it is woven into the fabric of everyday life. But it must be understood if it is to have its impact. The real challenge of the ministry is to dispense the truth clearly and accurately. Practical application comes easily by comparison.
by John MacArthur
from http://www.phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/
I have in my library a book by the spiritual father of a quasi-Christian cult. He argues that doctrinal statements, systematic theology and propositional truth claims are contrary to the spirit of Jesus' ministry.
That seemed a rather bizarre notion when I first heard it years ago. But the belief that Christ is against doctrine is a notion I seem to be encountering with increasing frequency.
No idea could be much further from the truth. The word doctrine simply means "teaching." And it's ludicrous to say that Christ is anti-teaching. The central imperative of His Great Commission is the command to teach (Matthew 28:18-20).
Yet there's no shortage of church-growth experts, professional pollsters, and even seminary professors nowadays who are cautioning young pastors that doctrine is too divisive, too threatening, too heady and theoretical—and therefore simply impractical.
Impractical? I agree that practical application is vital. I don't want to minimize its importance. But if there is a deficiency in preaching today, it is that there's too much relational, pseudo-psychological, and thinly life-related content, and not enough emphasis on sound doctrine.
Moreover, the distinction between doctrinal and practical truth is completely artificial; doctrine is practical. In fact, nothing is more practical than sound doctrine, because there's ultimately no basis for godly behavior apart from the truth of God's Word.
Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations mean little if they are divorced from divine principle. Before the preacher asks anyone to perform a certain duty, he must first deal with doctrine. He must develop his message around theological themes and draw out the principles of the texts. Then the truth can be applied.
Romans provides the clearest example. Paul doesn't give any exhortation until he has given eleven chapters of theology.
He scales incredible heights of truth, culminating in 11:33-36, where he says, "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given Him that it might be paid back to Him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen."
Then in chapter 12, he turns immediately to the practical consequences of the doctrine of the first 11 chapters. No passage in Scripture captures the Christian's responsibility in the face of truth more clearly than Romans 12:1-2. Resting on eleven chapters of profound doctrine, Paul calls each believer to a supreme act of spiritual worship—giving oneself as a living sacrifice.
So doctrine gives rise to devotion to Christ. What could be more practical? And the remainder of the book of Romans goes on to explain still more practical outworkings of one's dedication to Christ.
Paul follows the same pattern in Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1 Thessalonians. The doctrinal message comes first. Upon that foundation he builds the practical application, making the logical connection with the word therefore (Romans 12:1; Galatians 5:1; Ephesians 4:1; Philippians 2:1) or then (Colossians 3:1; 1 Thessalonians 4:1).
So we have imposed an artificial meaning on the word doctrine. We've made it something abstract and threatening, unrelated to daily living. That has brought about the disastrous idea that preaching and teaching are unrelated to living.
The scriptural concept of doctrine includes the entire message of the gospel—its teaching about God, salvation, sin, and righteousness. Those concepts are so tightly bound to daily living that the first-century mind did not see them as something separate from practical truth.
The New Testament church was founded on a solid base of doctrine. First Timothy 3:16 contains what many expositors believe is an early church hymn: "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." There, in capsule form, is the basis of all Christian teaching. Without that, no practical application matters.
The next few verses of 1 Timothy describe what happens when men depart from the basis of biblical truth: "Some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods, which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth" (4:1-3).
In other words, lying, hypocrisy, a dulled conscience, and false religious practices all have root in wrong doctrine.
No ministry activity is more important than rightly understanding and clearly proclaiming sound doctrine. In 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, Paul commissions two young men to the ministry. His central theme is the importance of adhering to sound doctrine.
Paul charged Timothy: "In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following" (1 Tim. 4:6). "Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching," Paul adds, "persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you" (v. 16).
Titus 2:10 says we "adorn [or honor] the doctrine of God" by how we live. When it comes to affirming sound doctrine, what we do carries far more significance than what we say. That's why it's disastrous when a pastor, seminary professor, or any kind of Christian leader fails morally. The message he proclaims is that his doctrine is unrelated to life. And for those whose lives he has touched, doctrine becomes merely an intellectual exercise.
True doctrine transforms behavior as it is woven into the fabric of everyday life. But it must be understood if it is to have its impact. The real challenge of the ministry is to dispense the truth clearly and accurately. Practical application comes easily by comparison.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
The Church by C Kolstad
I love serving the body of Jesus Christ. The church after all is the only organization in the New Testament that Jesus promised to bless and to preserve. Consider our Lord’s words in Matthew 16:18, “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.” The true church of God is invincible because Jesus promises to protect it. God’s people belong to a cause that cannot fail. Richard Phillips adds, “No matter what attacks the devil unleashes on the church, the church will always prevail.” This security is bound up in the promise of Christ Himself.
The church belongs to Jesus. It is His church (see Matt. 16:18). He secured the church through his atoning death and resurrection (see Eph. 1:22-23, 5:23-30, 1 Cor 6:20, Acts 20:28). The individual Christian’s invincibility is forged in the sovereignty of God’s protection (Rom 8:28-31); such is true concerning the universal church as well (Matt. 16:18-19).
Most of us love cheering for or playing on winning sports teams. We are much more motivated to be apart of a company that we believe is bound to succeed than to work for one that is failing. That is one of things that is so awesome about Christ’s church; because God is for it, we know it can not fail!
I do not know about you, but this amazing truth motivates me to pour my life, my blood, my sweat, my tears, in short, my all into God’s church. The Lord of the church reminds us of an important principle in Matthew 6:17-20, "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” A practical way you can apply this passage is by committing yourself to a local assembly (1 Peter 4:10-11). “If the Lord Jesus Christ cherished the Church so much that He died for her, is it too much for Him to ask His followers to cherish the Church and live for her?” (Joel Beeke)
The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes the importance of the local church (Hebrews 10:24-25). Pastor John MacArthur puts it this way, “Active local church membership is imperative to living a life without compromise. It is only through the ministry of the local church that a believer can receive the kind of teaching, accountability, and encouragement that is necessary for him to stand firm in his convictions.” In the infamous words of Alan Rivers, “What’s your ministry beloved?”
One of my favorite hymns, written in the 1800’s by Timothy Dwight, sums up my heart on this subject very well:
I love Thy kingdom, Lord,
The house of Thine abode,
The church our blessed Redeemer saved
With His own precious blood.
I love Thy church, O God.
Her walls before Thee stand,
Dear as the apple of Thine eye,
And written on Thy hand.
For her my tears shall fall
For her my prayers ascend,
To her my cares and toils be given
Till toils and cares shall end.
“To Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.” (Eph 3:20).
The church belongs to Jesus. It is His church (see Matt. 16:18). He secured the church through his atoning death and resurrection (see Eph. 1:22-23, 5:23-30, 1 Cor 6:20, Acts 20:28). The individual Christian’s invincibility is forged in the sovereignty of God’s protection (Rom 8:28-31); such is true concerning the universal church as well (Matt. 16:18-19).
Most of us love cheering for or playing on winning sports teams. We are much more motivated to be apart of a company that we believe is bound to succeed than to work for one that is failing. That is one of things that is so awesome about Christ’s church; because God is for it, we know it can not fail!
I do not know about you, but this amazing truth motivates me to pour my life, my blood, my sweat, my tears, in short, my all into God’s church. The Lord of the church reminds us of an important principle in Matthew 6:17-20, "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” A practical way you can apply this passage is by committing yourself to a local assembly (1 Peter 4:10-11). “If the Lord Jesus Christ cherished the Church so much that He died for her, is it too much for Him to ask His followers to cherish the Church and live for her?” (Joel Beeke)
The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes the importance of the local church (Hebrews 10:24-25). Pastor John MacArthur puts it this way, “Active local church membership is imperative to living a life without compromise. It is only through the ministry of the local church that a believer can receive the kind of teaching, accountability, and encouragement that is necessary for him to stand firm in his convictions.” In the infamous words of Alan Rivers, “What’s your ministry beloved?”
One of my favorite hymns, written in the 1800’s by Timothy Dwight, sums up my heart on this subject very well:
I love Thy kingdom, Lord,
The house of Thine abode,
The church our blessed Redeemer saved
With His own precious blood.
I love Thy church, O God.
Her walls before Thee stand,
Dear as the apple of Thine eye,
And written on Thy hand.
For her my tears shall fall
For her my prayers ascend,
To her my cares and toils be given
Till toils and cares shall end.
“To Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.” (Eph 3:20).
Friday, December 02, 2005
Understanding the Postmodern-Emergent Mind
By Jerry Wragg www.gibcjupiter.org
This is taken from Phil Johnson's site (under comment section) but i think it is well worth your read. If you don't have time to read DA Carson's critique of the Emerging Church then you really should read this blog. It was written in response to another person (who is sympathetic with these new movements). http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005/11/ugliness-everywhere.html
pomo = post modernism
EC = The emerging church
"Chewing before you swallow is one thing...but putting everything and anything into your mouth is just plain unhealthy!
See 1 Cor. 3:18-23 and 1 Tim. 6:3-5"
"One more thing...
You said, '...hurling Bible verses into the void, as if they interpret themselves, doesn't help'
First, the texts I cited were not "hurled into [a] void", but clearly were offered in the context of my caution about indiscriminate intake. It should've been obvious that I believe those passages teach us how to be discerning, never giving human wisdom any divine ground. But if I should've been clearer, I'm sorry.
Second, at least my volley includes some reference to places in scripture that I think bring clarity to our interlocution. If you want to dispute what I infer from these verses and offer a better understanding, be my guest...but don't accuse me of Bible hit-and-runs. Many of my comments have included passages that I believe, according to the exegetical work I've done, directly answer some of the issues. I must say, that's more than I've received from you my friend. You're right...verses don't interpret themselves, but neither will they ever enjoy such attention if the "dialogue" muses on in the pattern so far established.
Oh yeah, one more thing (I feel like Columbo), you strongly challenged Phil regarding an alleged "ignorance" of the profitable discussion taking place in pomo and EC circles.
OK...so you think the talk is positive. Now what? Are we supposed to feel bad that we don't agree. Honestly, I've heard, read, and otherwise eavesdropped on most of what is "definable" in the postmodern and emerging world...and I don't see any real, long-term, edifying positives.
Oh sure, their preoccupation with man's finiteness as an alternative to the rationalist arrogance of modernism might earn a brief "atta-boy", except that they use this "humble" concession as the main trump against a reachable objectivity (an arrogance of another kind---sorry, "atta-boy" removed).
Perhaps we could award them for championing "authentic relationships" over cold "linear proof" models, except that their definition of "authentic" is its own immoveable, linear proof by which they deem rational evidence inauthentic (since when did our culture become more superior at understanding social and intuitive influences than other eras?---sorry, "atta-boy" removed).
Or maybe we might thank the pomo's and EC'ers for their genuine interest in the worthiness and equality of all cultures, except that again this other-cultures sensitivity is used to argue that the subjective complexities of human communication make objectivity impossible (how in the world did I ever "connect" in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Greece, England, Scotland, South America, and France with so much abstraction?---sorry again, "atta-boy" removed).
You see, I'm truly thankful for the privilege of coming under the sanctifying grace of God's word in order to answer the challenges of postmodernism and the EC. What I will not do is join a "conversation", even a "positive" one, that requires me to check my Bible or my certainty at the door simply because the moderators think believing in attainable absolutes is "epistemologically naive", "academically obtuse", and "culturally insensitive". Whatever "relational positives" such dialogue promises, the dangers, in my judgment, far outweigh them.
Will the purveyors of this "new kind of Christianity" be around in 30 years to clean up the mess and take responsibility? The history of every movement entrenched in subjectivity demostrates otherwise. Everyone says "woops!", but the seed-planters are no where to be found."
Written by JWragg
This is taken from Phil Johnson's site (under comment section) but i think it is well worth your read. If you don't have time to read DA Carson's critique of the Emerging Church then you really should read this blog. It was written in response to another person (who is sympathetic with these new movements). http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2005/11/ugliness-everywhere.html
pomo = post modernism
EC = The emerging church
"Chewing before you swallow is one thing...but putting everything and anything into your mouth is just plain unhealthy!
See 1 Cor. 3:18-23 and 1 Tim. 6:3-5"
"One more thing...
You said, '...hurling Bible verses into the void, as if they interpret themselves, doesn't help'
First, the texts I cited were not "hurled into [a] void", but clearly were offered in the context of my caution about indiscriminate intake. It should've been obvious that I believe those passages teach us how to be discerning, never giving human wisdom any divine ground. But if I should've been clearer, I'm sorry.
Second, at least my volley includes some reference to places in scripture that I think bring clarity to our interlocution. If you want to dispute what I infer from these verses and offer a better understanding, be my guest...but don't accuse me of Bible hit-and-runs. Many of my comments have included passages that I believe, according to the exegetical work I've done, directly answer some of the issues. I must say, that's more than I've received from you my friend. You're right...verses don't interpret themselves, but neither will they ever enjoy such attention if the "dialogue" muses on in the pattern so far established.
Oh yeah, one more thing (I feel like Columbo), you strongly challenged Phil regarding an alleged "ignorance" of the profitable discussion taking place in pomo and EC circles.
OK...so you think the talk is positive. Now what? Are we supposed to feel bad that we don't agree. Honestly, I've heard, read, and otherwise eavesdropped on most of what is "definable" in the postmodern and emerging world...and I don't see any real, long-term, edifying positives.
Oh sure, their preoccupation with man's finiteness as an alternative to the rationalist arrogance of modernism might earn a brief "atta-boy", except that they use this "humble" concession as the main trump against a reachable objectivity (an arrogance of another kind---sorry, "atta-boy" removed).
Perhaps we could award them for championing "authentic relationships" over cold "linear proof" models, except that their definition of "authentic" is its own immoveable, linear proof by which they deem rational evidence inauthentic (since when did our culture become more superior at understanding social and intuitive influences than other eras?---sorry, "atta-boy" removed).
Or maybe we might thank the pomo's and EC'ers for their genuine interest in the worthiness and equality of all cultures, except that again this other-cultures sensitivity is used to argue that the subjective complexities of human communication make objectivity impossible (how in the world did I ever "connect" in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Greece, England, Scotland, South America, and France with so much abstraction?---sorry again, "atta-boy" removed).
You see, I'm truly thankful for the privilege of coming under the sanctifying grace of God's word in order to answer the challenges of postmodernism and the EC. What I will not do is join a "conversation", even a "positive" one, that requires me to check my Bible or my certainty at the door simply because the moderators think believing in attainable absolutes is "epistemologically naive", "academically obtuse", and "culturally insensitive". Whatever "relational positives" such dialogue promises, the dangers, in my judgment, far outweigh them.
Will the purveyors of this "new kind of Christianity" be around in 30 years to clean up the mess and take responsibility? The history of every movement entrenched in subjectivity demostrates otherwise. Everyone says "woops!", but the seed-planters are no where to be found."
Written by JWragg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)