ReformationUnderway

Several years ago, I read a book by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones named Spiritual Depression: Its Causes and Cure. (In our age of widespread use of psychiatric drugs to combat depression, the title of this book is somewhat unfortunate. If you have a conditioned impulse to react with doubt when you see the word depression, disengage that impulse when you approach the subject of Lloyd-Jones’ book. That is not what this book is about, and it was originally published in 1965, long before the day Prozac and similar drugs became so common in our culture.) I remember being somewhat surprised by the way the first chapter of Lloyd-Jones’ book ended. Let me give you the sense of it:

I suggest that the main trouble in this whole matter of spiritual depression in a sense is this, that we allow our self to talk to us instead of talking to our self. Am I just trying to be deliberately paradoxical? Far from it. This is the very essence of wisdom in this matter. Have you realized that most of your unhappiness in life is due to the fact that you are listening to yourself instead of talking to yourself? … The main art in the matter of spiritual living is to know how to handle yourself. You have to take yourself in hand, you have to address yourself, preach to yourself, question yourself. … The essence of this matter is to understand that this self of ours, this other man within us, has got to be handled. Do not listen to him; turn on him; speak to him; condemn him; upbraid him; exhort him; encourage him; remind him of what you know, instead of listening placidly to him and allowing him to drag you down and depress you. (pp. 20-21)

Does that surprise you like it did me? Here is the beloved preacher declaring that one of the big causes of spiritual depression is that we listen to ourselves instead of talking to ourselves. That is, we allow ourselves to be influenced by thoughts and accusations that come either from our own mind or from the accuser, rather than purposefully speaking truth to ourselves. The difference may appear somewhat subtle, but it is an important distinction. It is a distinction between passivity and pro-activity.

There is a short phrase in the Lloyd-Jones quote above that must not be missed if you are to profit from the discipline of talking to yourself rather than listening to yourself. It is this: “remind him of what you know.” In other words, simply talking to yourself is not going to be sufficient if the things you are talking to yourself about are the latest episode of The Simpsons or what you remember about the last time you played your favorite video game. No, you must speak Truth to yourself. Also, don’t fall into the trap of believing that this practice is only of value to those who are spiritually “depressed.” Not only is the constant application of truth to your life the cure for this malady, it is also the preventive practice, that which will protect your spirit from error.

I was reminded of this idea of Lloyd-Jones’ when I picked up a book by another author last week. The author is Jerry Bridges, and the book is The Gospel for Real Life. This book has been out since 2002, but I had never looked at it until last week. I have been a Christian for more than 20 years, and God has given me the grace to grow in faith and knowledge in ways that I do not deserve. Even so, I have found the simple clarity of this book to be very useful in my own life. In short, right after the Word of God itself, I would recommend that you read this book to sharpen your understanding of the Gospel of Christ. The sermons you preach to yourself will almost certainly be better sermons if you will do this.

Let me whet your appetite with an excerpt from chapter four, which deals with God’s justice.

Though God’s justice is often delayed, it is nonetheless certain.

God’s justice is also inflexible. Justice may be defined as rendering to everyone according to one’s due. Justice means we get exactly what we deserve - nothing more, nothing less. In our human system of justice a tension often exists between justice and mercy. Sometimes one prevails at the expense of the other. But there is no tension with God. Justice always prevails. God’s justice must be satisfied; otherwise His moral government would be undermined.

God does not exalt His mercy at the expense of His justice. And in order to maintain His justice, all sin without exception must be punished. Contrary to popular opinion, with God there is no such thing as mere forgiveness. There is only justice. … Yet this is what most people expect God to do. They think that God will somehow relax His inflexible justice and pardon all of us by mere sovereign prerogative. But God, by the perfection of His nature, cannot do that. God cannot exalt one of His glorious attributes, such as mercy, at the expense of another attribute - in this case His justice. Justice must be satisfied. What is the solution, then, to our own personal dilemma? What are we to expect when we stand before God’s bar of judgement?

The answer to our dilemma lies in the cross. Through His death on the cross Jesus fully satisfied the justice of God on our behalf. … Through His representative union with us, Jesus assumed our obligation to perfectly obey the Law of God and obeyed it to the letter. Through that same union Jesus assumed our liability for not obeying the Law and paid that liability to the utmost. He fully and completely satisfied the justice of God on our behalf as our substitute.

Therefore everyone who has trusted in Christ as Savior can say, “God’s justice toward me is satisfied.” … As believers we must keep in mind that Christ has satisfied the justice of God on our behalf. Never again should we fear the retributive justice of God. … One morning in my private devotions I was reflecting on my sin, which for some reason seemed particularly painful to me that day. In my discouragement I blurted out, “God, You would be perfectly just in sending me to hell.” Immediately on the heel of those words, though, came this thought: “No, You wouldn’t, because Jesus satisfied Your justice for me. … At the cross there is no tension between justice and mercy; instead, they meet in full harmony. Justice suffers no violence and mercy has full expression.

If the Truth as declared by Bridges in that passage did not stir you to worship your Savior again as you read it, then I would suggest you question yourself as to whether you know the saving Gospel of the Lord Jesus. His work on the cross, in all its fullness, should always move us to worship. And it you always want to be worshipping, you should always be preaching the Truth to yourself.

I can’t recommend this book by Bridges too highly. It is a brilliantly useful and usefully concise statement of Gospel Truth that every believer would do well to have preached to them every day.

NCCT’08 is in the can. This was the first time our congregation had hosted a conference on this scale, and the reviews from our guests have been overwhelmingly positive. As the director of the conference, this has been very gratifying.

A large number of people from our church family, and even a few who are part of other area churches, came together to serve those who attended the conference, and I could not have been more proud, in a good way, of all that was done to make our guests feel welcomed. The gifts, talents, and dedication of so many contributed to making the conference run smoothly.

The teaching was also excellent. I’ll have more to say on that in the next few days, but know that I’m back now, somewhat rested from the exhaustion that resulted from the four-day push through the conference, and excited to enjoy a bit of time soaking in this year’s conference before our team gets started with the detailed planning for NCCT’09.

Did I mention that we have commitments from both John MacArthur and Bruce Ware for NCCT’09?

Shortly after I was introduced to the man who serves faithfully as my pastor, and who I am privileged to call my friend, he began a series of sermons that staked out the cornerstones of sound theology which would direct the ministry of our church body. (This was in his first year as pastor of our church.) The subjects of the four sermons were:

• A High View of God
• A Correct View of Man
• A Pure Gospel
• The Authority of Scripture

From time to time in the years since the first time I heard this series, he will return to the topic as a refresher for those who have long been part of our church, and as a primer for those who have joined our fellowship more recently. To some, these principles would seem elementary to the point of eliciting a "duh." To others, they are revolutionary.

Each of these ideas is vital to holding and teaching sound doctrine. The neglect or ignorance of any one of them will radically distort the ministry of a church.

I had not given much conscious thought to the teaching of these sermons in several years - they've seemingly become part of the fabric of my pattern of thinking, as the way I analyze everything now passes through this grid. As I have spent more time examining the teaching and practice of the Emerging Church, I have been spurred to ponder these cornerstones again. It is my belief that those in the Emerging movement almost universally get all four areas wrong.

This led me to wonder where Emergent first left the narrow road. What erroneous (or demonic, or heretical) doctrine did they first embrace, thus allowing the Emergent train to jump the tracks?

Have you ever seen a loose tire get away from someone? It might have happened at a racetrack, or a tire store, or even your own garage. A tire rolling by itself has one big problem - it is very prone to wobbling. Once the wobbling begins, the tire is virtually certain to eventually fall over on the ground. What prevents a tire mounted on your car (and reasonably well balanced) from exhibiting this same behavior? The axle. The tire is mounted on the rim of a wheel, and the wheel is then fastened to the hub with lug nuts. The hub in turn revolves around the axle. The tire, wheel, and hub essentially become one, and they all rotate at the same rate. The axle, however, stays fixed, and the hub/wheel/tire assemble revolves around it.

So the key to having a tire rotate in a stable fashion is for it to have a fixed point, or axle, around which to rotate.

If we were to take the four cornerstone ideas above and place them in this tire and wheel analogy so that our doctrine operated (rotated) in a stable fashion, which would function as the axle, providing a fixed point for the rest of the assembly? Let's take a look at each.

A correct view of man by itself cannot reveal a pure Gospel, nor produce a sufficiently high view of God, as one would be dependent only upon natural revelation to form this view of God. So a correct view of man cannot be the axle.

A high view of God is vital to having a correct view of man, as God is the only truly useful point of reference to which man can be compared. However, a high view of God alone cannot go very far toward discovering or identifying a pure Gospel. A high view of God cannot be the axle.

What about a pure Gospel? The essence of the Gospel is that man is sinful and cannot be reconciled to a righteous, holy, perfect and just God, and so God the Father sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to be the worthy, perfect sacrifice so that God's just wrath over man's sin might be satisfied for the benefit of all who repent of their sin and place their faith in Christ. This contains the seed of a high view of God, and a correct view of man. So is this our axle? I say no.

The authority (and availability) of Scripture is the one thing that can foster all of the others. The Scriptures reveal a holy, righteous, patient, loving, just God. His glory is on display as His wrath is satisfied in the sacrifice of His Sin Jesus on the Cross of Calvary. These truths are communicated in Scripture. Man in all his depravity is likewise on display throughout the Scriptures, and thus a correct view of man is possible from studying the Scriptures. Finally, the Gospel in all its purity is communicated nowhere else as in the Scriptures. So, we have our axle - the authority of the Scripture.

It is belief in the authority of the Word of God, and the diligent study thereof, that allows man to hold correct doctrine concerning God, man, and the Gospel. Any step away from this core truth - this stabilizing axle - puts man and the Church in peril. Once man has rejected the Scriptures as the revealed truth of God, useful for teaching, correcting, reproof and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16-17), every other doctrine is open to debate, to question, and to rejection. When experience trumps truth, right doctrine cannot endure.

This, then, is where the Emergent/emerging movement jumped the track. You will hear Emergent disciples speak of the Scriptures as a changing collection of teaching. God's word, however, declares itself unchanging and eternal.

Often, questioning the meaning and authority of the Bible will be presented by Emergents as a outgrowth of humility. In saying this, Emergents are faulting all who would express certainty about the teaching and meaning of Scripture for arrogance. (Indeed, this very post is liable to elicit condemnation as the work of an arrogant evangelical.) Is this criticism legitimate?

Mark Dever, pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC, and a brilliant thinker, addressed this issue of how we view and respect the Word in a blog post some time ago. His words issue a blunt challenge to all who would veil their rejection of the truth of Scripture in supposed humility.

What we need is humble theology--theology which submits itself to the truth of God's Word. "Liberal" theology--theology which does not view Scripture as finally trustworthy and authoritative--is not humble before the Word. Churches which are tentative and decry dogmatism may sound humble, but it is not truly humble to do anything other than to submit to God's Word. Christian humility is to simply accept whatever God has revealed in His Word. Humility is following God's Word wherever it goes, as far as it goes, not either going beyond it or stopping short of it. …

The humility we want in our churches is to read the Bible and believe it–everything God has said, dogmatically, and humbly! It is not humble to be hesitant where God has been clear and plain.

What about you? Are you willing to accept the Word of God as His revealed truth, and conform your life and beliefs to its teaching? Or will you subjugate the Word of God to the "truths" revealed through your own experience?

The Bible, the very Word of God, must be our source and measure of all that is true. Apart from this, we cease to be the Church, and become idolaters, worshiping the creation of man.

Technorati Tags:
Doctrine, Scripture, Emerging Church

I am involved in organizing the 2008 Nashville Conference on the Church and Theology, coming up Feb. 8-10.



The conference is hosted by the church to which I belong, and features as speakers: Professor D. A. Carson; Dr. Steve Lawson, Pastor of Christ Fellowship Baptist Church of Mobile, AL; and widely-read blogger and author Tim Challies. Matthew Smith, from the Indelible Grace hymn projects, will be leading worship during most of the Saturday sessions. This promises to be an absolutely fantastic time of worship and instruction. It's not too late to register!

Technorati Tags:
Doctrine, NCCT08, Conferences, Emerging Church, Ecclesiology

I posted on Saturday concerning a Wall Street Journal article on church discipline. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor and pastor Hershael York writes concerning this article that he was interviewed by the WSJ reporter. However, after spending twenty-plus minutes on the phone with the reporter, and referring her to a man who had been disciplined by York's congregation, his interview didn't make it through the editing process. What York has to say is interesting:

So when the WSJ reporter called me, I explained its biblical basis, its practical application, and its obvious benefits. I reasoned that, if sin is indeed harmful, the cruelest thing we can do is leave someone in it. Confrontation must always be motivated by a sense of compassion and a desire for reconciliation. Then, to prove the point, I gave her the name and number of a man whom our church disciplined. His testimony is that he would not even be alive today had we not dealt with him as we did. Within the past week Ms. Alter called and interviewed this man and he told her the whole fascinating story.

He goes on to say,

All of her examples of discipline are negative. She did not include a single example which she portrays in a positive light. For this reason neither Buck Run (the church York pastors) nor I are mentioned in this article because we had nothing but positive things to say. Even the subject of our discipline says the action was not only deserved, but necessary and restorative. Not one word of that testimony is included.

Read York's account of the interview and the resulting article.

Technorati Tags:
Church, Doctrine, Church Discipline

I posted this elsewhere, so I'll just link to it here. Phil Johnson interviewed John MacArthur on the Emerging Church. Few are as plain-spoken as John MacArthur - it's well worth your time to read.

Technorati Tags:
Doctrine, Emerging Church, John MacArthur

Friday's edition of the Wall Street Journal carried an article in its Weekend Journal section on church discipline. The article primarily focuses on a divisive case from a small, independent Baptist congregation in rural Michigan. The article is available from the Journal's web site, at least temporarily. Read it here.

The practice of church discipline, when practiced, is usually based on the application of Matthew 18:15-20.

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (NASB)

The church in which I am a member does practice church discipline according to this passage. The process is always overseen by the elders who govern the church, and the pastor does not have the authority to remove someone from the fellowship apart from the agreement of the elders, and it is doubtful that the elders would take such a step unless they were unanimous in the conviction that breaking fellowship was necessary. In more cases than not, the sinning brother or sister repents of their transgressions and is restored to full fellowship before it ever comes to the point of bringing their sin before the congregation. That, in fact, is the goal of the entire process; not to make a spectacle of a sinner, but to restore them to fellowship with God and with the Body of Christ. There have been only a couple of instances over the last 15 years or so in which someone was removed from our fellowship because of an unwillingness to repent of a besetting sin.

Does your church practice church discipline according to this passage? How is it handled?

Technorati Tags:
Church, Doctrine
Church Discipline

Jonathan Leeman, at Church Matters blog, continues his series on Willow Creek's REVEAL program.

Part 5

Technorati Tags:
Philosophy of Ministry, REVEAL, Willow Creek

Jonathan Leeman, at Church Matters blog, continues his series on Willow Creek's REVEAL program.

Part 4

Technorati Tags:
Philosophy of Ministry, REVEAL, Willow Creek

There is an upcoming book by a gentleman named Collin Hansen, titled Young, Restless, and Reformed: A Journalist's Journey with the New Calvinists. The book looks to analyze the recent resurgence of Reformed doctrine, especially among younger evangelicals, and is due in April from Crossway.

Many Christian books are released with endorsements from well known pastors and/or scholars printed on the cover or jacket. You may well have read, or breezed over, hundreds of them. One of the endorsements for this upcoming book really caused me to pause, and to realize that in the space of just a few sentences I had been been encouraged and truly called to pray over the movement which spurred the book. Meditate on these words, written with the heart of a shepherd, from Dr. Don Carson:

While other movements have been making a bigger splash in the headlines, a number of strategic ministries have been quietly (and sometimes not so quietly!) upholding the doctrines of grace, planting churches, seeing people converted, teaching the whole counsel of God. These are now beginning to coalesce in a variety of mutually encouraging ways. It is a pleasure to recommend Collin Hansen's survey of some of these movements. This is not the time for Reformed triumphalism. It is the time for quiet gratitude to God and earnest intercessory prayer, with tears, that what has begun well will flourish beyond all human expectation.

(H/T: Justin Taylor)

Some time back, I posted elsewhere my reaction to a high-profile change of direction at Willow Creek Community Church, the Chicago-area church pastored by Bill Hybels. Willow Creek last year unveiled REVEAL, a survey-based toolkit for measuring the effectiveness of the ministry of a local church.

Over at Church Matters, the blog of Mark Dever's 9Marks equipping ministry, Jonathan Leeman has begun a series of posts in which he gives a critical examination of the REVEAL program as, well, revealed in the book of the same name. Leeman is a little less than halfway through the series, but I'll go ahead and post the three installments published to date.

Part 1

Part 2

Excursus

Technorati Tags:
REVEAL, Willow Creek, Philosophy of Ministry

I've been thinking, pondering, wondering about those who reckon themselves Christians and have followed a postmodern way of thinking, finding themselves with no anchor of certainty. (Some would call them Emergent Christians.) I'm seeking to identify the step, or place, where they strayed from the path, the turn that allowed them to stray from a true gospel. I think I have it, and tomorrow, I blog.

Until then, what is your take on the question? What doctrine did they abandon that let them wander so far afield with the gospel?