Kevin DeYoung's Blog, page 59

Monday Morning Humor

With St. Patrick’s Day coming up tomorrow, I thought you’d allow me to post this oft-traveled clip one more time.

Why Can’t the Church Just Agree to Disagree on Homosexuality?

It is difficult to exaggerate how seriously the Bible treats the sin of sexual immorality. Sexual sin is never considered adiaphora, a matter of indifference, an agree-to-disagree issue like food laws or holy days (Rom. 14:1-15:7). To the contrary, sexual immorality is precisely the sort of sin that characterizes those who will not enter the kingdom of heaven. There are at least eight vice lists in the New Testament (Mark 7:21-22; Rom. 1:24-31; 13:13; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-21; Col. 3:5-9; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; Rev. 21:8), and sexual immorality is included in every one of these. In fact, in seven of the eight lists there are multiple references to sexual immorality (e.g., impurity, sen­suality, orgies, men who practice homosexuality), and in most of the passages some kind of sexual immorality heads the lists. You would be hard-pressed to find a sin more frequently, more uniformly, and more seriously condemned in the New Testa­ment than sexual sin.

When the Bible uniformly and unequivocally says the same thing about a serious sin, it seems unwise to find a third way which allows for some people (in a church, in an organization, or in a denomination) to be for the sin and other people to be against the sin. History demonstrates that such half-way houses do not stand. Every doctrine central to the Christian faith and precious to you as a Christian has been hotly debated and disputed. If the “conversation” about the resurrection or the Trinity or the two natures of Christ contin­ued as long as smart people on both sides disagreed, we would have lost orthodoxy long ago.

All of these third ways regarding homosexuality end up the same way: a behavior the Bible does not accept is treated as acceptable. “Agree to disagree” sounds like a humble “meet you in the middle” com­promise, but it is a subtle way of telling conservative Christians that homosexuality is not a make-or-break issue and we are wrong to make it so. No one would think of proposing a third way if the sin were racism or human trafficking. To countenance such a move would be a sign of moral bankruptcy. Faithfulness to the Word of God compels us to view sexual immorality with the same seriousness. Living an ungodly life is contrary to the sound teaching that defines the Christian (1 Tim. 1:8-11; Titus 1:16). Darkness must not be confused with light. Grace must not be confused with license. Unchecked sin must not be con­fused with the good news of justification apart from works of the law. Far from treating sexual deviance as a lesser ethical issue, the New Testament sees it as a matter for excommuni­cation (1 Corinthians 5), separation (2 Cor. 6:12-20), and a temptation for perverse compromise (Jude 3-16).

We cannot count same-sex behavior as an indifferent mat­ter. Of course, homosexuality isn’t the only sin in the world, nor is it the most critical one to address in many church con­texts. But if 1 Corinthians 6 is right, it’s not an overstatement to say that approving same-sex sexual behavior—like sup­porting any form of sexual immorality—runs the risk of leading people to hell. Scripture often warns us—and in the severest terms—against finding our sexual identity apart from Christ and against pursuing sexual practice inconsistent with being in Christ (whether that’s homosexual sin or heterosexual sin). The same is not true when it comes to sorting out the millennium or deciding which instruments to use in worship. When we tolerate the doctrine which affirms homosexual behavior, we are tolerating a doctrine which leads people further from God. This is hardly missional leadership or kingdom Christianity. According to Jesus, it’s repentance for sexual immorality, not tolerance of it, which leads to human flourishing (Rev. 2:20-23). Christians who get this fundamental point confused are not purveyors of a liberating third way, but of a deadly and dastardly wrong way.

For more on this and other related themes, see What Does the Bible Really Teach About Homosexuality? The book releases in April.

A Brief Defense of Infant Baptism

It sounds like the beginning of a joke or a support group introduction, but it’s true: some of my best friends are Baptists. I speak at conferences with and to Baptists. I read books by Baptists (both the dead and the living). I love the Baptist brothers I know–near and far–who preach God’s word and minister faithfully in Christ’s church. I went to a Baptist church while in college and know that there are many folks of more credobaptist persuasion in my own church. I imagine the majority of my blog readers are Baptist. You get the picture. I have thousands of reasons to be thankful for my brothers and sisters in Christ who do not believe in baptizing infants.

And yet, I do. Gladly. Wholeheartedly. Because of what I see in Scripture.

One of the best things I get to do as a pastor is to administer the sacrament of infant baptism to the covenant children in my congregation. Before each baptism, I take a few minutes to explain why we practice infant baptism in our church. My explanation always includes some–but rarely is there time for all–of the following:

It our great privilege this morning to administer that sacrament of baptism to one of our little infants. We do not believe that there is anything magical about the water we apply to the child. The water does not wash away original sin or save the child. We do not presume that this child is regenerate (though he may be), nor do we believe that every child who gets baptized will automatically go to heaven. We baptize infants not out of superstition or tradition or because we like cute babies. We baptize infants because they are covenant children and should receive the sign of the covenant.

In Genesis 15 God made a covenant with Abraham. This covenant was sealed with the sign of circumcision in Genesis 17. God promised to bless Abraham. For Abraham this meant two things in particular, offspring and land. But at the heart of the covenant was God’s promise that he would be a God to Abraham and his children (Gen. 17:7, 8).

Circumcision was not just a physical thing, marking out ethnic Jews. Circumcision was full of spiritual meaning. The circumcision of the flesh was always meant to correspond with circumcision of the heart (Rom. 2:25-29). It pointed to humility, new birth, and a new way of life (Lev. 26:40-42; Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4; 6:10; 9:25). In short, circumcision was a sign of justification. Paul says in Romans 4:11 that Abraham “received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised.” God’s own interpretation of circumcision is that it was much more than just a physical sign for national Israel.

Remarkably, though, this deeply spiritual sign was given to Ishmael as well as Isaac, even though only Isaac was the continuation of the promised line. The spiritual sign was not just for those who already embraced the spiritual reality. It was to be administered to Abraham and his sons. Circumcision was not a simple equation. It didn’t automatically mean the recipient of the sign was in possession of the thing signified. Circumcision, like baptism, also pointed to belonging, discipleship, covenant obligations, and allowed for future faith that would take hold of the realities symbolized. Just as there were some in Paul’s day who were circumcised but not really circumcised (Rom. 2:25-29), some children of Abraham who were not truly children of Abraham (Rom. 9:6-8), so in our day there are some who are baptized who are not truly baptized. Children should be marked as belonging to the covenant, but unless they exercise saving faith, they will not grab hold of the covenant blessings.

Children today are baptized based on this same covenant with Abraham. Paul makes clear in Galatians 3 what Peter strongly suggests in Acts 2, namely that the Abrahamic covenant has not been annulled. It is still operational. In fact, we see the basic promise of the Abrahamic covenant running throughout the whole Bible, right up to the new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21.

Because sons were part of the Abrahamic covenant in the Old Testament and were circumcised, we see no reason why children should be excluded in the New Testament sign of baptism. Admittedly, there is no text that says “Hear ye, hear ye, circumcision replaces baptism.” But we know from Colossians 2:11-12 that baptism and circumcision carried the same spiritual import. The transition from one to the other was probably organic. As the Jews practiced proselyte baptism, that sign came to be seen as marking inclusion in the covenant people. For awhile circumcision existed along baptism, but as the early church became more Gentile, many of Jewish rites were rendered unnecessary, and sometimes even detrimental to the faith. Thus, baptism eclipsed circumcision as the sign renewal, rebirth, and covenant membership.

Although not conclusive all by themselves, there are several other arguments that corroborate a paedobaptist reading of the New Testament.

One, the burden of proof rests on those who would deny children a sign they had received for thousands of years. If children were suddenly outside the covenant, and were disallowed from receiving any “sacramental” sign, surely such a massive change, and the controversy that would have ensued, would been recorded in the New Testament. Moreover, it would be strange for children to be excluded from the covenant, when everything else moves in the direction of more inclusion from the Old Covenant to the New.

Two, the existence of household baptisms is evidence that God still deals with households as a unit and welcomes whole families into the church to come under the Lordship of Christ together (Acts 16:13-15; 32-34; 1 Cor. 1:16; cf. Joshua 24:15).

Three, children are told to obey their parents in the Lord (Eph. 6:1). Children in the church are not treated as little pagans to be evangelized, but members of the covenant who owe their allegiance to Christ.

Four, within two centuries of the Apostles we have clear evidence that the church was practicing infant baptism. If this had been a change to long-standing tradition, we would have some record of the church arguing over this new practice. It wasn’t until the sixteenth century that Christians began to question the legitimacy of infant baptism.

So we come to administer the sacrament of baptism to this child today with the weight of church history to encourage us and the example of redemptive history to confirm our practice. We baptize in obedience to Christ’s command. The sacrament we are about to administer is a sign of inclusion in the covenant community as circumcision was, and the water we are about to sprinkle is a sign of cleansing from sin as the sprinkled blood of bulls and goats in the Old Testament was. We pray that this little one will take advantage of all his covenant privileges, acknowledge his Lord all the days of his life, and by faith make these promises his own.

*****

I doubt I’ve changed too many minds with this post, but maybe I’ve helped my Baptist friends understand what we mean (and don’t mean) by infant baptism. Maybe I’ve clarified a couple misunderstandings. Maybe I’ve strengthened the convictions of a few paedobaptists who weren’t sure why they believed what they said they believed. No matter where you fall on this issue, I encourage you think through the topic with an open Bible and some good resources in hand.

As a paedobaptist I recommend:

John Murray, Christian Baptism
The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism , edited by Gregg Strawbridge.
Baptism: Three Views , edited by David F. Wright, with contributions from Sinclair Ferguson (infant baptism), Bruce Ware (believers only baptism), Anthony Lane (dual practice)
Daniel R. Hyde, Jesus Loves the Little Children: Why We Baptize Children
Bryan Chapell, Why Do We Baptize Infants

To understand how someone could come to embrace infant baptism, check out the “How I Changed My Mind” articles from:

Liam Goligher (Tenth Presbyterian Church),
Sean Michael Lucas (First Presbyterian Church – Hattiesburg, MS),
Dennis Johnson (Westminster Theological Seminary – Escondido, CA).

We hand out Johnson’s 14-page letter to his daughter (who was struggling with the doctrine of infant baptism) in our new members class.

9 Marks of an Unhealthy Church

Thanks to Mark Dever, many of us have become well acquainted with the 9 Marks of a Healthy Church. While these were never meant to be the last word on everything a church should be or do, the nine marks have been helpful in reminding Christians (and pastors especially) of the necessary substance we often forget in an age fixated on style.

In one sense the nine marks of an unhealthy church could simply be the opposite of all that makes for a healthy church, so that unhealthy churches ignore membership and discipline and expository preaching and all the rest. But the signs of church sickness are not always so obvious. It’s possible for your church to teach and understand all the right things and still be a terribly unhealthy place. No doubt, there are dozens of indicators that a church has become dysfunctional and diseased. But let’s limit ourselves to nine.

Here are nine marks that your church–even one that believes the Bible, preaches the gospel, and embraces good ecclesiology–may be unhealthy.

1. The more peripheral the sermon topic, the more excited the people become. One of the things I’ve always loved about University Reformed Church is that the sermons they love most are the ones that deal with the most central themes of the Bible. They love to hear about sin and salvation, about the glory of God, about providence, about Christ and the cross. It’s not that they never hear (or dislike) sermons on the end times or social issues or financial stewardship or marriage or parenting, but they seem most passionate about the messages that major on guilt, grace, and gratitude. I’m concerned when a congregation gets tired of hearing about the Trinity, the atonement, the new birth, or the resurrection and wants to hear another long series on handling stress or the 70 weeks in Daniel.

2. The church staff does not enjoy coming to work. Every job has its ups and downs. Every office will have tension from time to time. But lay leaders should take note when staff members seem sullen, unhappy, and have to drag themselves to church every day. Do the members of your church staff like to be around each other? Do they ever talk to each other as friends in the fellowship hall? Do you ever see them laughing together? If no, there may be burn out afoot, or conflict, or something worse.

3. The pastor and his wife do not get along. I’m not talking about the regular tiffs and periodic tough times every couple endures. I’m talking about a marriage that has grown cold and loveless, a relationship that is perfunctory and lacking in passion. Every church should have some mechanism in place to ask the pastor and his wife how their marriage is going (or not). Churches can survive a lot of conflict, but rarely will they be healthy, happy places if the pastor and his wife are quietly (or loudly) unhealthy and unhappy.

4. Almost no one knows where the money goes. Churches handle their finances in different ways. As churches get bigger it can be harder, or even unwise, for everyone in the church to have a say in the allocation of every dollar. And yet, when it comes to finances, erring on the side of transparency is rarely a bad idea. At the very least, there must be more than a small group of people who know (and have a say) in where the money goes. Don’t make the pastor’s salary a matter of national security.

5. The leadership team never changes or always changes. Both are warning signs. On the one hand, churches become ingrown when there is never any new blood among the leaders. If your elders, deacons, trustees, small group leaders, Sunday school teachers, VBS coordinators, and worship team members are the same now as they were during the Reagan administration, you have a problem. Maybe the old leaders are power hungry, maybe no one is being trained up, maybe no one new has come to your church in twenty years. All are big problems. On the other hand, if the elders are never interested in serving another term, and the staff members never stick around more than a couple years, and the volunteers only volunteer once, the culture of your church may be too confining, too full of conflict, or too unforgiving of honest mistakes.

6. No one is ever raised up from the church for pastoral ministry or sent from the church into missionary service. Good preaching inspires young men to preach. Clarity about the gospel stirs up men and women to share the gospel with those who have not heard. Smaller churches may not send our workers every year, but the congregation which almost never produces pastors and missionaries is almost never a healthy church.

7. There is a bottle neck in decision making. This may be the congregation’s fault. Some church members insist on approving every decision, from staff hiring to the time of the worship service to the proverbial color of the carpet. If everyone has to vote on every decision, your church will never be bigger than the number of people who can knowledgeably vote on every decision (which is pretty small). The bottle neck can all be the pastor’s fault. In some churches nothing happens without the pastor’s personal approval and direct oversight–a sure-fire recipe for turf wars, stunted growth, and the driving away of gifted leaders.

8. The preaching has become erratic. This may take on many forms. Maybe the pastor no longer shares the pulpit with other staff members and the occasional outside guest. Maybe the opposite is taking place and the pastor seems to be calling in the reserves more often than not. Maybe the preaching has become more vitriolic, or always hammers away at the same theme, or shows signs of little preparation. Maybe you’ve noticed that the preacher is relying more on video clips or prepackaged sermon outlines, or constantly re-uses sermon material from a few years ago. No one wants the preaching to be dull. Some variation is to be expected and welcomed. But take a closer look if the preachers seems doctrinally unstable, irritable, or exhausted.

9. There are issues everyone knows about but no one talks about openly. Unhealthy churches often have one major unwritten rule: the person who mentions our problems is the one with the problem. This could be a pastor who can’t preach, an organist who never sticks around for the sermon, an elder who is rumored to be in a compromised relationship, a youth director who doesn’t know how to talk to kids, a staff member who can’t get along with anyone, a leader who leads by fiat and intimidation. To be sure, many matters should be dealt with privately and quietly, but this is no excuse for turning a blind eye to what everyone can plainly see. Naming what everyone knows is often the first step in robbing the problem of its crippling power.

 

Monday Morning Humor

Passionately Pleading with God Is A Good Thing!

Guest Blogger: Jason Helopoulos

Do you passionately plead with God in prayer? Pleading is a good and necessary part of our Christian lives. We understand adoration, confession, supplication, and thanksgiving are good marks of a vibrant prayer life, but pleading is often neglected.

What is Pleading?

Pleading with God is that part of prayer (a subset of supplication) in which we argue our case with God, as Isaac Watts wonderfully says, “in a fervent yet humble manner.” It is not just petition, but petition well-reasoned. It is not just requesting, but passionately appealing. In pleading, we are making our case before God as to why He should grant our prayer request.

At first, this can seem awkward or inappropriate. Yet, we all would readily acknowledge that there is a natural impulse to plead our case. I never taught my children to do so, but they know how! It is natural to our persons and natural in our relationship with God. He doesn’t desire restrained requests. God is not looking for dispassionate, catatonic, listless disciples. And what is true of His disciples is also true of their prayers–He desires our passionate pleadings.

The Psalmist says, “Pour out your heart before him” (Psalm 62:8). He then offers these comforting words, “God is a refuge for us” (Psalm 62:8). We can pour out our hearts and need not shrink back in fear.

Pleading is biblical

The Syrophoencian woman does not hesitate to plead with Christ and she is rewarded with His merciful answer (Mark 7:24-30). Jeremiah cries out to the Lord, “Righteous are you, O Lord, when I complain to you; yet I would plead my case before you” (Jeremiah 12:1). Joshua pleads the case of the Israelites and the disgrace their annihilation would bring upon the name of God (Joshua 7:6-9); and God responds with His grace. Hezekiah pleads for his own life, “For Sheol does not thank you; death does not praise you; those who go down to the pit do not hope for your faithfulness. The living, the living, he thanks you” (Isaiah 38:18-19); and God grants him extended life. Our Lord tells the parable of the persistent widow and ends with the question, “And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night?” (Luke 18:7). This is just a small sampling. Passionate pleading occupies a real place in our prayer lives.

Safeguard

But notice Watts’ helpful safeguard. Pleading in prayer is only appropriate when practiced in a humble manner. We are to be passionate and fervent in our petition, but not proud or rude. We are subjects crying out to our King, servants bringing a request to our Lord, creatures petitioning the Creator. He lovingly desires our petitions, because they inherently recognize His sovereignty. We dare not turn the petition on its head by demanding a sovereign God follow our decree. Rather, we plead with Him, passionately, but humbly. We make our case, but rest content if He chooses not to answer our request. As Paul says, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:6-7).

How? 

So how do we plead? As Watts points out, the “arguments are almost infinite.” However, he would suggest that almost every argument falls under one of the following headings:

From the Greatness of Our Wants, Our Dangers or Our Sorrows

Example: My sorrows, O Lord, over press me and endanger my dishonoring of your name and your gospel. My pains and weaknesses hinder me from your service, that I am rendered useless upon earth and a burden to the earth.

The Many Perfections of the Nature of God

Example: For your mercies’ sake, O Lord, save me. Your lovingkindness is infinite; let this infinite lovingkindness be displayed in my salvation. You are wise, O Lord; though my enemies are crafty, you can disappoint their devices, and you know how by your wondrous counsel to turn my sorrow into joy.

Relationships God Has With Man

Example: Lord, you are my Creator, will you not have a desire to the work of your hands? You made me and fashioned me, and will you now destroy me? You are my governor and king; to whom should I fly for protection but to you, when the enemies of your honor and my soul beset me?

The Various and Particular Promises of the Covenant of Grace

Example: Remember your Word is written in heaven; it is recorded among the articles of your sweet covenant, that I must receive light and love, and strength and joy and happiness. Are you not a faithful God to fulfill every one of those promises? What if heaven and earth pass away? Yet your covenant stands upon two immutable pillars, your promise and your oath.

The Name and Honor of God in the World

Example: “For the Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land will hear of it and will surround us and cut off our name from the earth. And what will you do for your great name?” (Joshua 7:9)

Former Experiences of Ourselves and Others

Example: “In you our fathers trusted; they trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and were rescued; in you they trusted and were not put to shame.” (Psalm 22:4-5)

Name and Mediation of our Lord Jesus Christ

Example: We would willingly request nothing at your hands, but what your own Son requests beforehand for us. Look upon the Lamb, as he had been slain, in the midst of the throne; look upon his pure and perfect righteousness and that blood with which our High Priest is entered into the highest heavens, and in which forever he appears before you to make intercession. Let every blessing be bestowed upon me which that blood did purchase and which that great, that infinite, petitioner pleads for at your right hand.

As Christians, we should not shrink from pleading in prayer to God. Rather, let it occupy a routine place in our prayer lives. In all humility, let us fervently make our case before the great God of the Heavens and the Earth, while resting and content in His sovereignty.

Worship Is More Important Than Your Small Group

Guest Blogger: Jason Helopoulos

Like most of you, I love small groups. I love the “give and take” of the discussion. I love the interaction with others. I love the questions raised and the answers discovered. But as much as you and I may love small groups, corporate worship is more important.

Someone recently commented to me that pastors are the only ones who really enjoy Sunday mornings as the high point in the week. I hope not! This individual insisted that other Christians look forward to their small groups more than corporate worship. She said it is more exciting for the congregant to be in a small group where they can ask questions, pray for others, discuss their own views, and get to know one another more intimately. I understand this sentiment and appreciate the desire to connect with others, but in all humility I would say to this well-intentioned individual, “You don’t understand the distinct privilege corporate worship is. We are communing with the saints before the holy throne of a majestic God.”

Corporate Worship Is Unique

It is on the Lord’s Day, in the Lord’s house, with the Lord’s people, meeting with the Lord that the Christian should find their greatest delight. It should be the high-point of every Christian’s week. It is unlike any other assembly; no matter how enjoyable small groups or any other gathering may be. In 1 Corinthians 11:18, we read of instructions for “when you come together as a church,” indicating that there was a unique gathering “as a church” that was not the same as a few Christians hanging out and talking about Jesus. Hebrews 10:25 commands us not to neglect meeting together (literally, “do not forsake the assembly of yourselves”). The word for “meet together,” episynagogen, refers to the formal gathering of God’s people for worship, not just friends listening to sermon downloads in the same room or engaged in an inductive bible study. God’s people gather weekly for worship. Our lives are lived from Lord’s Day to Lord’s Day, as each week we long to “journey to the house of the Lord” to meet with our God and with His people.

The contention that corporate worship is not as stirring as small groups usually revolves around four complaints: it is too “pastorcentric,” passive, boring, and impersonal.

Too “Pastorcentric”

It is argued that, “As congregants, we merely sit in the pew and listen to a monologue for thirty minutes. Is the preacher the only one with a meaningful word to convey? It doesn’t seem right that one man would speak and everyone else should listen.” I would suggest that such views serve more as a reflection of our own vanity, self-importance, and individualistic Western cultural mindset than anything else? There is a reason the sermon has never been exchanged for a question and answer time. We gather to hear proclamation, not discussion. The pastor is ordained to minister the truth of God’s Word and administer His sacraments. Therefore, when he enters the pulpit, he is to speak and apply the Words of Christ to His people. The service is not “pastorcentric,” it is Christocentric. We need to hear a Word from outside of us. He is the Creator, we are the creation. He is the King, we are His subjects. He is the Head, we are the body. He speaks and we listen. Like Job, it is right and good that we would put our hands over our mouths and just listen to what the Scriptures tell us about who God is and what He requires of us (Job 40:4). Fallen human beings need the weekly routine of listening, which requires a halt to the questioning, philosophizing, and speculation we so often entertain. Mary was commended by the Lord because she chose what was best. She knew that when the Lord speaks, we are to listen, absorb, and delight in hearing His voice (Luke 10:38-42). There is a time and place for discussing and asking questions about the Word of God. It serves a real purpose, but frankly, it matters more what God has to say than what we have to say.

Too Passive

The second complaint lodged against corporate worship usually concerns the contention that it is too passive, whereas small groups provide more opportunity for involvement. This is an unfortunate misunderstanding of what happens in worship. Corporate worship is anything but passive. The congregation not only participates when it sings, but is to engage the prayers prayed, the confessions read, and the preaching of God’s word just as actively. In fact, every element of the service should engage our persons. We are to listen not only with our ears, but our very hearts. We are to have our minds renewed (Romans 12:2),  our souls pierced (Hebrews 4:12), and apply it to our lives that we might walk in truth (1 John 1:6). This occurs by attentive, edge-of-the-seat engaged, expectant and faith-filled listening. Corporate worship is not passive! If we are attending it rightly, we should not only leave the service refreshed in Christ, but expended.

Too Boring

The third complaint too often lodged against corporate worship is that it is boring compared to the interaction that occurs in small groups. What is boring about meeting with the living God of the universe? Ask Isaiah if it is boring to meet with a holy God(Isaiah 6). Ask John if it is boring to commune with a glorious God (Revelation 1). Ask the saints, angels, and living creatures in heaven if it is boring to be in the presence of the God of salvation (Revelation 5:6-14). Just as they are enjoying the very presence of the Lord and it fills them with delight, so it is to be with us. As real as the people are in our small group Bible studies, so as real is God’s presence with us in corporate worship. God is meeting with us by His Word and His Spirit. There is nothing boring about that!

Too Impersonal

The third complaint lodged against corporate worship in favor of small groups is that it is more impersonal. No doubt, we should enjoy the fellowship with others that small groups afford. Small groups serve a real purpose. As I said, I am thankful for them. Churches suffer when there is no forum for life on life discipleship, group Bible study, and a place to ask questions. Yet, our fellowship in corporate worship is no less real. When we sing, we are not only singing unto the Lord but to one another (Colossians 3:16). When prayer is offered by a pastor or elder, we are not silent spectators. Rather, we are joining our voices together as is demonstrated by our corporate “Amen” in closing. When the sacraments are taken they not only signify and seal our communion with the Lord, but with one another (1 Corinthians 11:17-12:31). We are one body, unified in one Lord, one Spirit, and one baptism (Ephesians 4:3-6). And nothing declares that louder than our partaking of the Lord’s Table together in worship. As wonderful as shared coffee cakes, hugs, and group discussions are, they do not surpass the intimacy we enjoy and are reminded of when we partake of the body and blood of the Lord with one another.

I love small groups. Don’t misunderstand me. They serve a real purpose in most churches, but their importance cannot and does not supersede our gathering together in corporate worship. We are the church. Worship is what we do. We gather together to meet with God, to hear His Word, to partake of His sacraments, to offer Him prayers and praise, to give our offerings, to confess our sins, to hear once again His assurance of pardoning grace, to dwell with Him. And we do this together every week. It becomes the very pattern of our lives. And though routine, it is the most important and glorious aspect of our lives.

 

 

Monday Morning Humor

You Cannot Have Two Masters

You can have two friends. You can have two hobbies. You can even have two jobs. But you cannot have two masters.

Slavery is absolute, it requires all of you—all your time, all your allegiance, all your work, all your heart, all your soul. You may try to have two masters, but it doesn’t work. You will end up being devoted to one and despising the other.

You may think you can be a Christian and love Jesus and go to church and be passionate about the gospel and have a little fling with money, or flirt with pride, or enjoy the fruits of the sexual revolution on the weekends. Not going to work. You can’t marry Jesus and date on the side.

What are you working for? What are you dreaming about? We are you living for? What can’t you live without?  If only I had _________, I’d be happy. What’s in that blank: kids, spouse, grandkids, house, job, health, wealth, prosperity?

Do you remember the parable of the sower and the soils? Each plant grows a little bit more and gets a little closer to making it. The one that looks good for quite awhile is the plant that grows up from the seed thrown among the thorns. It grows up for a time, but then gets choked out by deceitfulness of riches and the worries of life. Too many promising young “Christians” are done in by the cares of this world and the craziness of life. That happens, all the time. Maybe it’s happening to you. Maybe it’s happening to me.

We cannot serve two masters. Jesus isn’t looking for a 60-40 split. He demands total allegiance, complete surrender, unequivocal worship. Don’t buy the lies you’re hearing from money, pride, and sex. Only God gives you real worth. Only God gives you real affirmation. Only God will make you truly special and truly loved. Only God can give you real security. If you can only serve one master, make sure you choose wisely.

Keeping His Commandments

1 John is clear: we are all sinners and we all sin (1 John 1:8, 10). If we say we have not sinned, we are not real Christians. But 1 John is also clear that if we do not keep God’s commandments, we are not real Christians either (1 John 2:3). So how can this be? Isn’t there an inconsistency here? We can’t be spiritual successes and spiritual failures at the same time.

Calvin understood this seeming inconsistency and provided a wonderfully balanced response. Commenting on 1 John 2:3 and wondering how anyone can be said to know God if the prerequisite for knowing God is keeping his commandments, Calvin replied:

To this I answer, that the Apostle is by no means inconsistent with himself; since before showed that all are guilty before God, he does not understand that those who keep his commandments wholly satisfy the law (no such example can be found in the world), but that they are such as strive, according to the capacity of human infirmity, to form their life in conformity to the will of God. For whenever Scripture speaks of the righteousness of the faithful, it does not exclude remission of sins, but on the contrary begins with it.

In this short paragraph we find much wisdom for navigating the sanctification debates in our own day. Calvin does not want to sidestep the whole point of 1 John 2:3. He acknowledges (as he must in order to be biblical) that obedience is a necessary component of Christian discipleship and of our Christian identity. And how does this fit with the earlier statements about our continuing sinfulness? Notice four points in Calvin’s response.

1. He does not take the language of “keep[ing] his commandments” to be a reference to sinless perfection. The obedience John expects of the Christian is not the obedience of fully satisfying the law of God. We need a category for non-meritorious, flawed, stumbling, but genuine obedience. Through his Son, God is pleased to accept that which is sincere, although accompanied with many imperfections (WCF 16.6).

2. He includes repentance as one aspect of holy living. Walking in the light means not only avoiding the deeds of darkness, but being honest about our sins and running to Christ for forgiveness and cleansing (1 John 1:5-7). Keeping the commandments requires a daily turning from sin and turning to Christ.

3. He is not embarrassed by the language of moral exertion. We must be passionate about pursuing Christlikeness. We must make an effort to be obedient to God’s commands. We should try hard to be holy. The Spirit will not allow us to be negligent, but will enable us to be diligent in stirring up the grace of God within us (WCF 16.3).

4. And yet, even this striving will be marked by weakness. The best we can do is to strive “according to the capacity of human infirmity.” As Calvin says later, while we will not love God perfectly we should nevertheless “aspire to this perfection according to the measure of grace given unto [us].”

Granted, there is much more to be said about sanctification than what Calvin touches upon in a few sentences. But affirming these four points–and not just affirming them in a statement of faith, but preaching them, tweeting them, writing about them, and commending them–would go a long way toward establishing a balanced and biblical approach to Christian discipleship. We strive, we aspire, we obey. We struggle, we sin, we repent. If our doctrine of sanctification does not embrace all this we are out of step with Calvin, out of step with the Reformed tradition, and, most importantly, out of step with the Bible itself.