Author

By In Politics, Theology

The End of the Evangelical Christian? A Response to Russell Moore

The rise of Donald Trump has caused Christians of all varieties to question their conservative bona fides. There are many reasons conservatives have chosen Donald Trump. Some have chosen the real estate mogul as the most suited to destroy the Washington machine. Some support the former Apprentice host as the voice of anger for those silenced by the mainstream media and the establishment GOP. Others find his open hostility to illegal immigration his most redeeming value. But while conservatives may have a few reason for voting for the Donald, conservative Christians, in particular, are having a more difficult time. After all, these conservative evangelicals are contemplating voting for someone who believes in God but has not sought God’s forgiveness. In Trump’s world, that is not a contradiction, and for some evangelicals, the contradiction is an acceptable compromise.a

The result has been unnerving for many evangelicals who are generally on the side of Ted Cruz; a conservative Southern Baptist from Texas, who speaks the evangelical language with extreme ease. They cannot fathom why conservative Christians have endorsed someone who does not understand the most fundamental of evangelical commitments.

Some evangelical leaders have embraced Donald Trump enthusiastically. Consider the very conservative Southern Baptist, Robert Jeffress, who endorsed Trump and referred to the Republican front-runner as a “great Christian.” Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. praised Donald as “a successful executive and entrepreneur, a wonderful father and a man who I believe can lead our country to greatness again.” (more…)

  1. While the passion for a Trump candidacy seems to be on the rise, a vast majority of Conservative voices on the right and liberal voices on the left have found  a surprising common ground: #nevertrump.  (back)

Read more

By In Politics, Theology

Andy Stanley’s Big Frustration with Little Churches

Post by Uri Brito and Dustin Messer

In a recent sermon, Andy Stanley made the staggering observation:

When I hear adults say, ‘Well I don’t like a big church, I like about 200, I want to be able to know everybody,’ I say, ‘You are so stinking selfish. You care nothing about the next generation. All you care about is you and your five friends. You don’t care about your kids…anybody else’s kids.’ You’re like, ‘What’s up?’ I’m saying if you don’t go to a church large enough where you can have enough Middle Schoolers and High Schoolers to separate them so they can have small groups and grow up the local church, you are a selfish adult. Get over it. Find yourself a big old church where your kids can connect with a bunch of people and grow up and love the local church.

Stanley has since apologized in the way modern preachers apologize: via twitter. 

While we take him at his word (or tweet, as the case may be), this was not simply a slip of the tongue. While he may be sorry for the way in which he communicated the message—even sorry for a specific sentiment in the message—one can’t fake the sort of passion exhibited by Stanley as he described his antipathy for small churches. Again, we believe he’s genuinely sorry we’re offended, but Stanley clearly has heartfelt feelings about non-megachurches (microchurches?) that didn’t begin or end with the sermon in question. Below are three reasons we feel such a sentiment is harmful: (more…)

Read more

By In Scribblings

What is Lent?

What is Lent? Lent is the penitential season of the Church. Lent is the purple of royalty. Lent is the desert before the promised land of the Resurrection. Lent is the pathless mazes of the wilderness. Lent is the war against the disease of sin. Lent is the long wait Jacob endured for Rachel. Lent is the “Thus saith the Lord,” when the devil whispers, “Who said ye shall be like God?” Lent is the sacrifices of incomplete priests. Lent is the exile of a perfect man so that we might be set free. Lent is the love of injustice poured on a just Man. Lent is fasting with hope. Lent is giving up idols and turning to the true icon of God, Jesus Christ. Lent is finding joy in the midst of suffering. Lent is loving without expecting to be loved. Lent is death. Lent is death to us. Lent is repenting and being forgiven. Lent is exploring your weakness. Lent is judging yourself first. Lent is John the Baptist preparing the way of the Lord. Lent is a pattern for redemption. Lent is God moving his people from desert to city, from ruin to a new civilization. Lent is obedience through sacrifice, love through death.

Why Lent? Because Lent takes away our arrogance. It instills a sense of need. It builds a habit of dependence. It prepares our wounds to be healed by Another. Lent is the power of Another to do what we cannot do for ourselves. We need Lent because without it Christ is no king, we are no people, and life is no gift. We all must take up our cross and follow the Christ of the cross. In Him, we move and live and have our being.

Read more

By In Theology

The Upside-Downness of the Gospel: A Look at the Beatitudes, Part IX (Final)

Part VIIIPart VII, Part VIPart VPart IVPart IIIPart IIPart I

Note: I trust you have enjoyed this series of posts on the Beatitudes. My goal was to make them succinct for the reader who wished to navigate that glorious sermon.

 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

This is the last of the eight beatitudes and naturally it is the culmination of them. Jesus is saying that by living in this paradigm; by embracing this approach to life you will be persecuted. But not simply persecuted for any reason, but for righteousness’ sake. True righteousness is living by this standard. This is again the paradoxical nature of our faith that in order to seek righteousness and peace we will have to fight against those who seek unrighteousness and violence and war. Jesus came to bring peace, but the result of this peace was persecution from religious leaders and society, which Jesus came to redeem. Though Jesus was pure in heart, yet he was persecuted to death.

Jesus builds on the eighth beatitude and adds something to it. He was so certain of the persecution his disciples would undergo that he gave a few examples of how this is going to unfold:

“Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. [12] Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Even if there is no persecution for the way you live before men, there will be persecution from those who despise the gospel proclamation. Persecution is personal, but it is almost always communal. Many people are enemies of the truth and you will see their faces on the media, their writings; everything they say is in direct contrast to the truths you embrace. If the gospel is your deepest joy and living the gospel your greatest desire then it is to be expected that it will be daily mocked and scorned. One consequence of being in the kingdom of heaven is to be misunderstood by those outside the kingdom. How can they understand the culture of heaven when they have been trained by earthly teachers?

One early church father puts it this way:

“…whoever is not excited about the praise of people also is not humiliated by their accusations.”[1]

How shall we then live?

There is a strong emphasis on persecution in Matthew’s gospel, precisely because there was so much persecution occurring in the first century. I am referring to persecution in the biblical sense; that is, the kind that makes you literally lose your head. That’s the persecution the Gospel proclaims. What we judge as persecution in this country is not persecution in the Biblical sense. We would minimize the sufferings of our brothers and sisters in the Middle East if we equate their suffering with our suffering in this country over such things as abusive taxation or government intervention.  Verse 11 says they will revile and accuse you of all sorts of things because we believe and part of this new kingdom. The kind of suffering we have in our lifetime is marginalization and accusations. That is not persecution in its biblical definition. This is why Jesus expands the definition in verse 11, because while not all Christians will be persecuted, all Christians will be reviled and accused and marginalized at some time or another.

Verse 11 expands on the eighth beatitude. Jesus says that they will revile and accuse you of all sorts of things because we believe and are a part of this new kingdom. In our lifetime, the kind of suffering we have is not persecution as the prophets and disciples speak. What we have is marginalization and even isolation. This is why Jesus expands the definition in verse 11, because while not all Christians will be persecuted, all Christians will be reviled and accused and marginalized at some time or another.

The gospel and the kingdom caused the first-century society to make a decision concerning allegiance. Are you willing to be cut off from your loved ones to be connected to a new family for the sake of the kingdom? Are you prepared to be marginalized for speaking the truth in a world of lies? Are you willing to lose friends over the issues of abortion, same-sex marriage, sex outside of marriage, the authority of the Bible, and the priority of the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus?

The Beatitudes are a “summons to live in the present in the way that will make sense in God’s promised future; because that future has arrived in the present in Jesus of Nazareth. The kingdom may seem upside down, but we are called to believe…that it is in fact the right way up.”[2]

[1] Ancient Commentary Series on Matthew (the incomplete version)

[2] N.T. Wright; commentary on Matthew.

Read more

By In Worship

Why you don’t need to preach without notes

Guest post by Jake Belder

One of the things I hear every now and then from newer preachers is that they have an ambition and desire to be able to preach with simple notes, or even without notes. At our college Communion service at St John’s College the other week, the visiting preacher preached without notes, and many people said afterwards how amazed they were by this. And rightly so – she didn’t stumble at all, the words ‘uh’ and ‘um’ were pretty much absent from her vocabulary, and the sermon was clear and structured.

Does this mean that all preachers should aim to preach without notes? When people suggest to me that they should, there are a few things I usually say in response. That is not because I presume to be an expert on preaching, but having done it regularly over the past three years, I have a few thoughts borne out of experience.

In the first place, every preacher has different abilities. The preacher at our Communion service clearly had the sort of memory that could just absorb things as she prepared, which could then be distilled verbally without any written prompts. My brain doesn’t work that way, however. It’s not that the stuff I take in while I prepare to preach doesn’t stay there, but the way my memory works, were I to go into the pulpit without notes, I would have a lot of difficulty calling it all back to mind. Give me a pen and paper and I can probably write it all out again, but to share it all verbally without prompts would be difficult for me. As a result, I use a script when I preach, and I’m unapologetic about that fact. I’ve worked hard during the week to expound the text and to put the sermon together, and when I get into the pulpit I want to make sure that everything that needs to be said gets said clearly.

Secondly, in response to this, some new preachers are concerned that if they use a script it will sound like they are reading an essay. That will only be true if you write it like an essay. One of the things you learn when you preach is to find your own voice. For me, that means that when I write a few sentences or a paragraph for a sermon, I read them back to myself to make sure it sounds like something I would say. It means I don’t always use proper grammar, that I don’t worry too much about colloquialisms, and that I sometimes write in a sort of ‘stream of consciousness’ style. And because I try and write in the way I speak, when I get into the pulpit, I only need to glance at a line I’ve written to remember what’s there. That frees me up from having to focus too much on it to make sure I read it correctly.

Sometimes after I’ve made these points, those who advocate preaching without notes might make one final comment, and that is to suggest that to preach a scripted sermon is to stifle the work of the Holy Spirit. Honestly, I think that is nonsense. When I preach, I can think of at least four distinct ways I depend on the work of the Spirit: first, to sanctify me; second, to write the truths of the passage I’m preaching from on my own heart first; third, to guide me in my study and preparation; and fourth, to take my words and to use them to open up the truth of God’s Word so that his people will be built up in faith. If that’s not depending on the Spirit, I don’t know what is. And yes, that means that sometimes when I’m preaching I will feel prompted to say things other than what I’ve written. But more often than not, it means I stick to what’s on the page in front of me.

If you can preach with bullet points or without notes, that’s great. But I don’t think that is a goal that every preacher needs to aspire to. God uses you as you are, with your unique abilities and gifts. And if your desire is simply to proclaim his Word faithfully so that his people are transformed more and more into the likeness of Christ, and so that others come to know the risen Lord Jesus, then he will do that work by his Spirit whether or not you need to have notes in front of you.

(And yes, that’s a photo of me preaching from a couple of years ago. With notes.)

Originally published here.

(more…)

Read more

By In Theology

The Upside-Downness of the Gospel: A Look at the Beatitudes, Part VIII

Part VII, Part VIPart VPart IVPart IIIPart IIPart I

Perhaps in the history of the 20th century no one hated the idea of humility, gentleness, meekness, and peace–as described in the Beatitudes– more than Friedrich Nietzsche.[1] Though he was the son and grandson of Lutheran pastors, he rejected the Christian faith in his student days and became what one author described “the representative unbeliever of the 20th century.”[2] Even though he lived in the 19th century, the 20th century was the century his works became known all over the world. And they became known primarily because of his famous declaration that God is dead. You may also be aware of the famous humorous reply: “Nietzche said God is dead; God said Nietzche is dead.”

If you know the story of Nietzche you know that he went mad; insane. But a year before he went insane, he wrote one of the most violent and polemic works against the Christian faith entitled The Anti-Christ. “In answer to his own question: “What is more harmful than any vice?” he replied, “Active sympathy for the ill-constituted and weak – that is, Christianity.”[3] Christianity, according to Nietzche, was a religion of pity instead of power. He believed the Christian God was the god of the sick and weak. Further he writes: “I condemn Christianity,” he wrote. “…it has made of every value a disvalue.” For all his ferocious antagonism for the Christian faith, he understood that the values of the kingdom of heaven are completely different/opposite to the values of the world he envisioned. In Nietzche’s world, only the strong and powerful and those possessing authority were valued; those who cannot help themselves have no value in his world. Adolf Hitler took these ideas quite strongly and the application of Nietzche’s philosophy led to the barbaric slaughter of millions of Jews in the 20th century. Ideas have consequences. It is no wonder that Nietzche’s madness became a perfect demonstration of where worldly values must eventually lead.[4] In Nietzche’s world, only the strong could reign, where mercy and meekness were mocked. The kingdom of heaven through its great message in the Beatitudes created an entirely different world; a world that is upside-down to those who are perishing.

We will see once again the upside-downness of the kingdom and the heavenly nature of it when we see that the way we are called to live is in direct confrontation to the way the world lives.

Jesus says in verse 9: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (more…)

Read more

By In Scribblings

Lenten Devotionals and Readings

As we enter the Lenten Season, many of us are looking for healthy ways to engage in this penitential time of the Church Calendar. My presupposition is that whether you are part of a tradition that observes Lent or not, we all need a season of our lives to meditate on the cross of Christ and to give special attention to the forgotten doctrine of repentance. We are on day one of Lent, so here is a list of several devotionals and readings:

Lent CREC devotionals: These are pastoral devotionals for the family. They contain three Lenten readings each week and a full week of readings during Passion Week.

Lent with the Church Fathers: Meditate these next forty days on the writings of 10 Church Fathers. These are 15-20 minute readings.

Celebrating Lent with Kids: Dozens of ideas and readings for our children during this rich season.

Reading the Jesus Story Book Bible During Lent: Reading Plan by Sally Lloyd-Jones

Lent with Martin Luther: Learn more about the richness of the Lutheran tradition and their theology of the cross.

Five Books for Lenten Meditation: Lenten reflections from well-known evangelicals and much more.

 

Read more

By In Theology

Give the King Thy Judgments, O LORD: Constantine, Augustine, and the Legacy of Western Christendom (Part II)

 

Guest post by Jared Lovell (part 2 of 2)

In the previous post, we looked at the context in which Constantine ruled by highlighting the significant events of his rise and reign. 

Constantine’s Reforms

Having set out the events that shaped Constantine’s historical context, the reforms and policies of his reign must be considered in this light. First, Constantine made reforms in the law that lessened the cruelty and recognized the dignity of human beings. From constant foreign and civil wars, to gladiatorial entertainment, to infanticide, to merciless punishments for criminals or political prisoners, Rome was a harsh and violent environment. Constantine began to reverse this trend. Most famously, he ended the persecution of Christians and extended tolerance to all religions in the empire. Constantine outlawed crucifixion as a means of execution and prohibited the use of torture to a person’s face, believing that the face reflected the image of God in man. The bloody spectacle of the gladiatorial games were also outlawed. Laws were also passed that expanded the property rights of women as well as affording them more protection against sexual depredation.15 The practice of infanticide, which had always been condemned by the church, was largely undermined by a combination of laws which prohibited parricide (the hastening of the death of a family member), provided assistance to desperate mothers unable to take care of their children, and incentivized adopting parents to claim unwanted children as free or slaves.16

Such laws as those aforementioned would not be found objectionable by today’s secular-minded critics. But what of Constantine’s favor toward the church which shocks the conscience of modern notions of separation of church and state? The second kind of laws to be considered are those in which Constantine sought to defend the church and to restore to it what had been taken during the persecution. In this regard, he was not acting outside of his duty as a magistrate to see that justice was preserved by applying standards not inconsistent with laws concerning restitution in the Lex Talionis. Constantine began by extending exemptions from taxation to churches as were already enjoyed by pagan priests. He then went further by returning lands to churches that had been confiscated from them by the state. Property that had been forfeited by martyrs was also returned to family members or to the church if no family members survived. But Constantine went even further when he began to donate money from the public treasury in order to restore churches that had been destroyed or neglected as well as constructing new churches and chapels. Yet, it may be argued that this action did not constitute state favor toward the church as much as it did the application of restorative justice. Constantine sought not merely to reimburse the church for its losses, but to restore them to the position that they would have held had the state not made war against them. Finally, Constantine also extended power and influence to the church by opening up the courts for the bishops to act as judges of disputes. While such action may seem to demonstrate an unhealthy union between church and state, it actually served as a check upon the power of the state that would have major implications for the development of law in the west.17 It has been typical throughout history for the state to try to accrue to itself a monopoly on administering justice. By allowing bishops to render judgment on civil disputes brought to them, pressure was taken off of an overburdened court system and resolution to conflict could be brought more quickly to the parties involved.18 It also served an educational purpose as people would not look to the state alone as the sole source of legal authority. (more…)

Read more

By In Books

Book Review: The Way of Holiness: The Study in Christian Growth

Prior, Kenneth. The Way of Holiness: The Study in Christian Growth. InterVarsity Press, 1982

The book functions as a systematic overview of the Christian’s journey from salvation (justification) to glorification. With pastoral care, Prior engages the reader in a study of the way life works through the operation of the Holy Spirit. The Christian life is far from a mechanical model, but a dynamic model that undergoes various stages. The author leads the reader towards the goal of holiness. Holiness is not an immediate status achieved, but a status worked out by the Christian.

While providing a few helpful illustrations (33 & 95), a useful overview of the work of the Spirit, a valid critique of perfectionism, the author, in the reviewer’s estimation, fails the consistency test. Though the author discusses quietism and pietism (130) and offers helpful refutations of both models, Prior seems to fall into one category or another throughout the book. Perhaps he was seeking to avoid both extremes, but the language used throughout implies a variation of pietism and quietism inherent in his discussion of holiness. Simply put, the author does not distance himself enough from those categories. Quoting Keswick authors on two separate occasions, he seems to downplay the redemption of Christ’s work in the world after his Ascension. He treats passages that have a particular first-century context as universal for all times and all places. While Paul says the devil was the god of this age, can we make that statement universal in light of Jesus’ enthronement. Such language may imply a form of despair with this world’s status and plunge the Christian into forms of quietism or pietism precisely what the author wants the reader to avoid. (more…)

Read more

By In Politics, Theology

Give the King Thy Judgments, O LORD: Constantine, Augustine, and the Legacy of Western Christendom (Part I)

 

Guest post by Jared Lovell (part 1 of 2)

The streets of Rome thronged with celebrants awaiting the advent of the victorious new emperor. Though it was typical for emperors or kings upon their ascension to be contrasted with their predecessors and praised as the ushers of a new era of peace and prosperity, on this day the world really was different from that which existed in those previous. It was October 29, 313, the day after the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Regardless of what actually occurred leading up to the battle, whether there was a sign in the sky or a message communicated in a dream, Constantine emerged the victor, and the church of Christ had indeed entered a new era. For the first time, a sympathizer, if not yet a believer, of the Christian faith sat on the imperial throne.  This change in the political context of the early church has been regarded as a negative one by many in the modern world. Constantine and “Constantinianism”1 are easy targets for those holding to a broad spectrum of varying theological persuasions and serve as a kind of shorthand for critics for all that is wrong with Christianity in general and the church in particular. From Dan Brown’s fictional Da Vinci Code, which was very popular among secular audiences, to Anabaptist theologians such as the late John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas, to even a segment of the Reformed community,2 the “Constantinian shift” is a lamentable detour in the course of church history. That has happily expired, and any remaining vestiges of it must continually eliminated.

Surely all sides would acknowledge some immediate benefits to the early church due to Constantine’s ascension, the most obvious being the cessation of the fierce persecution of the church begun under Diocletian and continued under Galerius and Maxentius. Some critics, however, would claim that the presence of a Christian emperor and his continued favor towards the church set up problematic trajectories that weakened the church over time through nominalism and syncretism. Others, based on historical myths, would object more strongly to Constantine’s supposed use of the sword to force conversion to Christianity. In either case, Constantine’s legacy is considered to be a net negative for the church in history. However, a proper analysis of Constantine must do more than run his ideas and his actions through the grid of modern liberal secularism, the propositions of which are largely accepted uncritically by moderns, Christian and non-Christian alike. What if the Enlightenment and the precepts of modern secularism are not actually an improvement upon Constantinianism and thus not a valid standard of evaluation? What if agnostic neutrality in the public sphere is a myth? Rather than the standard hasty dismissals of Constantine and Western Christendom that followed in his wake, it is the intention of this author to provide a more Augustinian critique of the church and state relationship in the fourth and fifth centuries from which we may benefit today. In God’s providence, Constantine was used to guard the church as it rose into a new position of prominence in the world which brought its own unique benefits and problems and, tempered by the political philosophy of Augustine, constituted a step forward in the history of the Western church. (more…)

Read more