Geoff Chang on Spurgeon and 9Marks

By / Dec 3

In this video, FTC.co asked Geoff Chang, curator of the Spurgeon Library and assistant of Historical Theology at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, whether Spurgeon would have adhered to the 9Marks of a healthy church.



Leading From the Pulpit

By / Dec 3

The preacher should live as a preacher, watching his life and doctrine. The preacher should also labor as a preacher, giving himself to the hard work of prayer and the ministry of the word. And the preacher should lead as a preacher.

The pastor is often judged by the work he does outside of the pulpit more than the work he does in it. Yet there is no biblical dichotomy between the pastor as a preacher and the pastor as a leader. Preaching is leadership!

First and foremost, the pastor-teacher is charged to preach the word (2 Timothy 4:1-2). His leadership should flow out of his preaching, not compete with it. In a real sense, expositional preaching should result in expositional leadership. As goes the pulpit, so goes the church.

Why should the pastor-teacher lead from the pulpit?

Preaching builds pastoral influence. Leadership is influence. Influence requires trust. Trust takes time. Your title does not give you credibility. Your character does. The best way to gain leadership influence is to live and preach the word. The power is in the pulpit, not the boardroom. Don’t go into meetings as if you are the C.E.O. of a corporation. Go to the pulpit as if you are the shepherd of a flock who labors in preaching and teaching.

Preaching develops biblical convictions. The primary job of the pastor-teacher is to make disciples who think and act biblically. The disciple-making process consists of teaching believers to obey the commands of Jesus. This is the heart of pastoral work. Preaching cultivates a biblical worldview in strategic ways nothing else can. Preach in such a way that helps your people understand what they believe and why they believe it.

Preaching regulates corporate worship. Many churches live with a divorced but cohabitating relationship between music and preaching. However, music in worship should be an extension of the ministry of the word (Colossians 3:16). The corporate worship of the local church should be word-centered. Sing, read, pray, preach, and enact the word in baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Preaching should be the compass that guides worship.

Preaching nurtures spiritual leadership. Paul passed the truth on to Timothy, who was to pass it on to faithful men who would be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2). A church enjoys a legacy of spiritual leadership as faithful men teach the truth. The church should develop leaders through its pulpit ministry, not just personal mentorship. Teach the entire congregation what the biblical expectations of spiritual leadership, not just the leaders.

Preaching encourages mutual care. The Lord gives pastor-teachers to the church to equip the saints for the work of the ministry (Ephesians 4:11-12). The pastor’s job is not to do all of the ministry. It is his job to equip the saints for the work of the ministry. Pastors are not chaplains. Pastors are equippers who teach the saints to serve. Do not rob the church of the opportunity to strengthen their spiritual muscles through mutual care for one another.

Preaching provides spiritual counsel. Biblical preaching explains the meaning of the text and exhorts hearers to trust and obey the word of God. In counseling, pastors do personally and privately what they do corporately and publicly in preaching. Show people how to walk by the lamp and light of God’s word. The more work the preacher puts into preaching the less work the preacher should have to put into counseling.

Preaching summons Christian workers. The church is not a spectator sport. We believe and practice the priesthood of all believers. Every Christian is to be a participating member of the local church. Most church members get involved by personal invitation. But the pulpit should supply “air cover” by promoting high-commitment membership. Preaching should emphasize that Christlike service is essential to Christian discipleship.

Preaching models effective evangelism. Christians are challenged to witness. Unfortunately, they are not taught how to share their faith. Preaching should teach and model evangelism. Explain biblical truth clearly and carefully. Respond to spiritual objections with gentleness and respect. Directly address unbelieving hearers. Clearly present the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ in every message you preach.

Preaching prioritizes church health. Pastors and churches should always prioritize church health over church growth. Congregational health consists of fidelity of doctrine, holiness of lifestyle, and unity of fellowship. Preaching should reject the bigger-is-better delusion. The pulpit keeps the main thing the main thing. Focus the church on its Christ-given mission. A Bible-teaching pulpit nurtures a Bible-regulated congregation.

Preaching establishes congregational stability. Church life is seasonal. Sunday days can turn into stormy days. Fruitfulness can be followed by barrenness. Times of growth can turn into plateau or decline. Trouble can arise in the congregation from without and within. Preaching the word in season and out of season stabilizes the church in season and out of season. Plant and water the seed of the word and trust the Lord to give the increase in due season.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published at hbcharlesjr.com. 



Merry Christmas from Charles H. Spurgeon

By / Dec 2

Charles Spurgeon loved Christmas. In fact, he once said, “I like Christmas; I wish it came six times a year.” He liked the generosity of “those who give to the poor,” and as for the cheer of the season exclaimed “I would not stop a smile. God forbid me!”

Indeed, Spurgeon really loved Christmas, so much so that he wished “there were ten or a dozen Christmas-days in the year.” After all, “there is work enough in the world” and he thought “a little more rest would not hurt labouring people.”

Indeed, again, Spurgeon really, really loved Christmas so much that he wished “there were twenty Christmas days in the year.” For, it was seldom that “young men can meet with their friends” and distant relatives could be “united as happy families.” Indeed, Christmas was “one of England’s brightest days,” the “great Sabbath of the year,” and a sacred “family institution.”

However, Spurgeon also said “I have no respect to the religious observance of the day.”

When Spurgeon spoke of the “religious observance of the day” he had in mind the institutionalization of the 25th of December as an “ecclesiastical custom” of “purely popish origin.” Spurgeon was no scrooge, but he demurred about the canonization of Christmas which made it a cultural ornament.

In Spurgeon’s view, the true significance of Christmas was that it “compelled” people to “think of the birth of Christ.” Indeed, Spurgeon argued that “you may keep his birthday all year round” if one remembered that “in a spiritual sense he is born every day of every year in some men’s hearts.” For Spurgeon, the Incarnation was the foundation of mankind’s salvation, and that made it all the more beautiful.

For Spurgeon, the Incarnation was “a mystery, a wondrous mystery” more easily believed than defined. While he believed it was impossible to find words which were “exactly accurate” to describe the “wonderful incarnation” he nonetheless had much to say.

In the Incarnation “God has become flesh.” Simply, “the Infinite has assumed the form of an infant.” When Christ came down he was “as really man as he is God” just as he was “God and man in one person.”

Jesus Christ, in his human nature, was “born,” “begotten of the Holy Ghost,” and “born of the Virgin Mary.” But, in his nature as God he was “not born; but given,” “begotten of his Father from before all worlds,” “begotten – not made, being of the same substance with the Father.”

Jesus Christ was “man, yet God.” He was “allied to us in ties of blood” and in his atoning death the “groans of pain,” and the “moans of despair” were put to death themselves. In taking on the “weakness of man” he died as the Christian’s substitute, and “had he not died we must have died for ever.” For Spurgeon, the Incarnation was “a means to atonement.”

In light of this, Spurgeon insisted that “the doctrine of the incarnation of Christ is meat to your soul,” while the “great truth” of his “substitutionary sacrifice” was “the most nourishing cordial to your heart.” Indeed, Spurgeon could not help but to exclaim, “Oh, that glorious doctrine…there is healing in it!”

For Spurgeon the response was simple, all were commanded to “Come and worship God manifest in the flesh.” Christians, like the wise men, were to “bring your offerings,” including the “gold of love,” the “frankincense of praise,” and the “myrrh of penitence.” Indeed, he said “When you have realized all that Christ’s incarnation and death have meant for you…your heart must surely have danced at the sound of his name.”

However, the salvation wrought by this miracle which “outmiracles miracle” came with implications. First, if anyone had “any doubt” about whether Jesus Christ was “willing” or “able” to save they had no cause for fear. For, Christ had proven his purpose when he “left the thrones and royalties of heaven to be born into this world as a babe.”

Second, the “great reality” of the Incarnation demanded that believers “turn away from all the frothy novelties of modern thought and the vain inventions of man.” Rather, the Christian was to “behold the crown of your adorable Lord,” and “dwell on the literal, historical incarnation of the Son of God.”

Finally, Spurgeon said that “when heaven entrusts a man with a merciful revelation, he is bound to deliver the good tidings.” Just as the angels were tasked spreading the message abroad, so too then Christians “must keep this Christmas by telling to your fellow-men” the great news of “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified.”

This Christmas Spurgeon would have us contemplate Christ and His Incarnation and:

“Go home to thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on thee.” – Mark 5:19

Editor’s Note: This post originally appeared at Spurgeon.org.



When Home Hurts: A Book Review

By / Dec 2

It is very likely that When Home Hurts: A Guide for Responding Wisely to Domestic Abuse in Your Church (Christian Focus, 2021) by Jeremy Pierre and Greg Wilson will prove to be the most important book I’ve read all year. At the time of my writing this, it is the beginning of November, which means there are still two months of reading ahead of me, and this prediction could prove untrue, but I find it unlikely. As a pastor, I have a deep heartache for the sinful circumstances that have transpired in our body in the past couple of years, which have eventuated in this work’s place on my bookshelf. But I am nevertheless profoundly grateful for God’s grace in giving me and my fellow pastors the opportunity to grow in wisdom and care for Christ’s precious flock.

Brother pastor, even if your church is not currently experiencing the same kind of circumstances that contributed to my reading this book, may I gently and firmly urge you to prioritize reading it as soon as possible? Rather than offering you a generically styled book review, let me offer four reasons why every pastor should read When Home Hurts.

1.) Pastors Must Show the Heart of Christ

The wise care of abused church members is an indispensable aspect of pastoral care. It is a nonnegotiable application of the heart of Christ. The Lord Jesus Christ, the Good Shepherd, invites the weary, exhausted, broken, and sinful into his compassionate heart when he says, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matt 11:28-30). Those thusly invited includes those who labor under the cruel yoke of oppressors in their home, who are heavy laden with the suffocating reality of constant fear and anxiety, most often imposed on them by the very people who bear the responsibility of embodying to them the heart of Christ (i.e., husbands and fathers).[1] It will not do to hide behind lack of knowledge or expertise as a justification for staying in the dark regarding this area of ministry. It will not do to blame the dearth of (actually) helpful pastoral care classes you received in seminary. Frankly, pastor, those excuses amount to just about nothing. We have been charged to shepherd the flock of God, which he purchased with his own blood (Acts 20:28). We have been charged to shepherd the flock of God that is among us (1 Pet 5:2), which often includes abusers and abuse victims. Surely, we are fooling ourselves if we think that these half-baked excuses are acceptable to him.

Let’s determine right now to kill that self-protecting impulse to plead blissful ignorance. The painful fact, brothers, is that we often hide behind a lack of knowledge simply because it is more convenient to us. We say, “we can’t be everything, we aren’t professional counselors or police officers.” No, but we are under-shepherds charged to reflect the heart of our Good Shepherd who wields a staff to guide and protect the flock (and fend off wolves), and we must do the same. We say, “but there are professionals out there who are far more knowledgeable than me.” Yes, but God has not providentially arranged for them to pastor our members. He had us in mind for such a time as this. Caring for the abusive and abused members of our church is not optional. When Home Hurts is the third book I’ve read from cover to cover on domestic abuse, and it is far and away the best one specifically for pastors in search of wisdom for this crucial component of their vocation.

2.) The Dynamics of Abuse are Unique

In one sense, abuse is a sin just like any other sin: it is an offense to God and it rightly elicits his wrath; its solution is the shed blood of Jesus Christ; it ought to be confronted by members and pastors, confessed and repented of by the perpetrators, and forgiven by others, etc. In another sense, however, the sin of abuse (or “oppression,” to use Scriptural terminology) is uniquely insidious. Notice this definition of abuse they offer on page 39-34:

Abuse occurs as a person in a position of greater influence uses his personal capacities to diminish the personal capacities of those under his influence in order to control them. Because God made people as embodied souls, these personal capacities are both physical and spiritual. Abuse is identified from two directions: (1) the manipulative intent and behavioral forcefulness of the one in a position of influence, and (2) the diminishing effect on those under his influence.

Thus, Pierre and Wilson distinguish between relational sin in general, and the sin of abuse or oppression in particular. Every believer, though definitively justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, nevertheless must mortify the sinful flesh perpetually in this life. Sin exists in every Christian household, and since the Christian life is one of repentance, it should not be uncommon for confession, repentance, and forgiveness to be liberally extended in every direction in the home. Most often, sin rears its ugly head when members of a household sinfully put their desires or preferences before those of others. This is relationally damaging if left unrepented of, and should be addressed squarely and soberly for the good of all those involved. This kind of sin Pierre and Wilson describe as “me before you.”

Abuse, however, is uniquely insidious in that it desecrates the personhood of the abused and dehumanizes both abused and abuser. This kind of sin shows up when one person uses his God-given strength/authority/influence not only to please himself, but to diminish the strength/authority/influence of the victim in the process. In contrast to normal relational sin that might be described as “me before you,” Pierre and Wilson refer to the sin of abuse as “me over you.” It involves a kind of manipulation that diminishes the capacities of the victim (and therefore minimizes their agency and dignity). This can happen in a number of ways: be it physical attacks, physical intimidation, emotional manipulation, financial manipulation, relational control, verbal assaults, and more (most often, domestic abuse is manifested in some combination of these things). The unique characteristics of this kind of sin means that we shouldn’t be naïve in our approach: a great deal of care is needed, and Pierre and Wilson are incredibly helpful at laying out a practical path for recognizing and confronting this sin.

3.) The Church is Full of Sinners and Suffers (including Abusers and Abuse Victims)

Domestic abuse is far more common than you think, and your church probably isn’t an anomaly. The statistics are pretty breathtaking. Even the most conservative estimates make it incredibly unlikely that your church has no abusive homes represented in the membership. Yes, this is true even if your church is gospel-centered. Yes, this is true even if your church is confessional, or richly biblical, or even (believe it or not) reformed.

At the time of my writing this, our current elder team consists of six godly men—three of which hold theological Masters degrees, and the other three of which hold PhDs in theology. We are located near a seminary, which means we have many theology students and professors in our membership. We are a bookish people. We care about doctrine. We care about biblical literacy. We are about practicing all of the biblical “one anothers.” Confession of sin is routine in our church. We love one another with theologically informed love. And those of our members who aren’t swimming in immediately in this “seminary pool” quickly develop a taste for theology as a means for worship. And we aren’t embarrassed one bit about any of that.

But you’re reading these words because none of these wonderful aspects of our church demographic have kept sin—and specifically, the sin of domestic abuse—at bay. And why should it? This is a fallen world, and even with practices like biblical church membership and discipline, sin—including the sin of abuse—persistently shows up. And the important thing to note is this: some sins aren’t obvious to pastors who don’t know how to look for them, but that does not mean they should not learn how to.

And yes, pastor, reading this book when you “don’t have to” may burst your bubble. You may find yourself in a situation where your happy ignorance is ruined, and families you thought were healthy are actually in deep trouble. Which means, reading this book when you “don’t have to” may create a lot more work and a lot more stress in your life. Please, brother pastor, don’t let that be a reason for not reading it. Be inconvenienced. Imagine the answer to prayer your reading this book might be for the sisters and children in your congregation who are suffering in isolation! If that is not motivation for us to delve deep, we may need to find ourselves a new vocation.

4.) Pastoral Care Isn’t One-Dimensional

When Home Hurts is deeply pastoral and instructive in its application of distinct biblical impulses. Often, pastors feel conflicted in these kinds of situations because they can bring healthy, biblical values into tension with one another. On the one hand, it is virtuous to be charitable and transparent; love “believes all things,” after all, and so when men in the congregation respond to allegations of abuse with apparent contrition and seemingly humble “clarification” regarding how difficult their wives are to deal with, we feel the impulse to believe the best about them and minimize the severity of their wives’ allegations. False allegations are possible, after all, and we should have an allegiance to the truth over and above everything else. On the other hand, it is clear in Scripture that God has a deep hatred not only for unequal weights and measures, but also the oppression of the weak. Pierre and Wilson understand all of these dynamics, and they are not at all prepared to sacrifice any portion of Scripture for another. They are rather clear in laying out a prudent path forward, with all the uncertainty in mind, in light of the fact that false accusations of domestic abuse are incredibly rare, and safety of potential victims should come first. The truth of the situation will come to the surface in the process of securing safety for the potential victims and expressed concern for the potential abusers.

The common factor that distinguishes domestic abuse as abuse is the pattern of controlling and manipulative behaviors that reinforce the self-entitlement of the abuser and diminishes the capacities and dignity of the abused. Domestic abuse is a direct assault on God in the sense that it is a desecration of the imago Dei, and it is doubly egregious in marriage since it is an assault on the one-flesh union that God intends to be a living parable of the gospel. Though abuse is always intentional, it is very often perpetrated by individuals who have been so self-deceived that they are unaware of the sinful intentions of their own hearts. Which means sometimes, simply taking people at their word is actually profoundly unloving. You don’t have to pretend like abusive husbands are self-consciously lying when they insist that their wives are insane or mentally unhealthy or the problem to their marriage. Most of the time, they sincerely believe this, and they are sincerely wrong; sin has radically warped their perception of themselves and those around them. Which is to say, this kind of sin brings about a lot of confusion, and Pierre and Wilson are a great help at showing how to bring light to murky situations. For all these reasons and more, I heartily commend this book to you.

[1] Since, statistically, the overwhelming scenario for domestic abuse is husbands/fathers abusing their wives/children, I’m simply reflecting that scenario with my language here. However, I recognize and grant that abuse can exist with different relational arrangements, though this is circumstantially rare.



Episode 145: Complications with Community

By / Dec 1

On this episode of the FTC Podcast, Jared discusses some of the ways members can frustrate the experience of gospel-centered community in their churches.



Losses of a Prayerless Christian

By / Dec 1

Though God is sovereign over all things, He ordains the means of prayer. There are some things He will not do unless we pray, though He always does all He purposes (Psalm 135:6). The mystery does not change this truth:

You do not have because you do not ask (James 4:2).

If you do not ask . . .

1. Evangelistic work will be hindered.

“The harvest truly is plentiful, but the laborers are few. Therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest.” ( Matt 9:37-38; see also Col. 4:3; 2 Thess. 3:1; Eph. 6:18-19).

2. You will enter into more temptation.

“And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one . . . ” (Matt. 6:13).

3. You will not get what you want.

“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you” (John 15:7).

4. You cannot successfully prove you are His disciple.

” . . . ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you. By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples” (John 15:7-8).

5. You will not have all the joy you could have.

“Until now you have asked nothing in my name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full” (John 16:24).

6. You will forfeit some of God’s protection and deliverance.

“And He will yet deliver us, you also joining in helping us through your prayers, so that thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf for the favor bestowed on us through the prayers of many” (2 Cor. 1:10-11).

7. You will often misunderstand God’s ways.

“Now therefore, I pray You, if I have found favor in your sight, let me know Your ways that I may know You, so that I may find favor in Your sight” (Ex. 33:13; also see Psalm 25:4).

8. You will continue to be worried.

“Be anxious for nothing, 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 through Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:6-7).

9. Some may not be healed.

“Is any among you suffering? Let him pray . . . . Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up” (James 5:14-15).

10. You will not glorify God as much as you could.

“Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son” (John 14:13).

11. You will miss much of the beauty of the Scriptures.

“Open my eyes, that I may behold wonderful things from Your law” (Psalm 119:18).

12. You will not accomplish as much for God.

“The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much” (James 5:16).

It is no wonder that the church once “continued steadfastly” in prayers, and the leaders gave themselves “continually to prayer.” We can comprehend why Paul admonished us all to “continue earnestly in prayer, being vigilant in it with thanksgiving,” and why he wanted the men to “pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands.” And it makes sense why a widow is cared for if she “continues in supplications and prayers night and day” (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col. 4:2; 1 Tim. 2:8; 5:6).

“Prayer,” said the 19th century preacher, Charles Spurgeon, “is the tender nerve that moveth the muscle of omnipotence.”

We cannot afford not to pray.

Ask and it will be given to you (Matt. 7:7).

 

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published at ccwtoday.org. 



Isaiah’s Hope of Dawn: An Advent Reflection for the Weary

By / Nov 30

Living in the Darkness

Recently I was working my way through portions of Isaiah in order to shape my prayers of intercession. As I read the following passage, so much seemed similar to our current headlines around the globe. I felt a genuine heaviness as I prayed and considered what this passage speaks to. Yet there was also something that surprised me––something that proved to be quite hope-giving. Beginning in Isaiah 8:11, the prophet declares:

For the LORD spoke thus to me with his strong hand upon me, and warned me not to walk in the way of this people, saying:  “Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread. But the LORD of hosts, him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.  And he will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.  And many shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken.” (Isa 8:11–15)

They Have No Dawn

With the stage of conspiracy, confusion, and fear set briefly before us, let’s move into the surprise:

To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn! (Isa 8:20)

It is because they have no dawn? That was my surprise. I read on….

They will pass through the land, greatly distressed and hungry. And when they are hungry, they will be enraged and will speak contemptuously against their king and their God, and turn their faces upward.  And they will look to the earth, but behold, distress and darkness, the gloom of anguish. And they will be thrust into thick darkness. (Isa 8:21–22)

In a snapshot, this is what Isaiah seems to be saying. The people he envisions are confused, in dread, and conspiring. Many (it is prophesied), will stumble on the teaching of the Lord to the point that they will fall, be broken, snared, and taken! Why? Because they have no dawn! They live constantly in the dark, like a never-ending night. And what shall become of these for whom morning light never comes? Chaos, depression, and anger. The people will be thrust into thick darkness, where shadow will never give way to shine.

These are not light words!

So why does Isaiah say, “… because they have no dawn?” Every corner of the world has dawn at some point. So an inability to see the sunrise could not be what Isaiah meant as the cause to this chaos and gloom.

“Day” Ends in Light, Not Darkness

At this point, my mind made a connection. Among the very first words in the Scripture we read:

God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness…. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. (Gen 1:4–5)

My husband loves to bring this to attention in his teaching—and I can hear his excited voice in my head, “Did you get that? The created day doesn’t end with evening; it ends with morning!” In God’s creative order he gave light to conquer the darkness. Dawn is a sign of hope.

Do you ever wake up and throw open the curtains discouraged to see the sunrise hidden by the gloom? Maybe you find your soul in a perpetual state of sadness—no matter how bright the morning light. Does the end of Isaiah 8 speak more of your vantage point these days than you wish?

As I pondered this, the strength of this dawn reference grew stronger! This gracious God, Creator of light, order, and beauty also created the darkness (Isa 45:7). But do not be confused, children of God: the light will win and, in the process, serve as a poignant contrast against the night.

On Them the Light Has Shone

Chapter 8 ends with darkness, gloom, and scorn. But Isaiah believed hope would rise and burn away the darkness. As chapter 9 opens:

The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the land of deep darkness on them has light shone. (Isa 9:2).

My mind leaps back again to Genesis 1:5: “There was evening and there was morning, the first day.” What rays of warmth and goodness! I’m picturing the scene of first light splitting through the darkness now. If you find yourself under the gloom, confusion, and distress of the long shadows, do not forget the dawn. Our hope continues:

For unto us a child is born, to us a son is given. (Isa 9:6a)

There it is. Our glorious source of hope! That beautiful dawn sunlight that shines into my home so many mornings is not the answer. But it is a hopeful reminder and pointer. We see that the ultimate light is Jesus Christ. “In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4). As Jesus said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (8:12).

Fix your eyes on him. As Isaiah 8 instructs, fear him, not the dread of this world. Let him be your sanctuary.

And the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace! Of the increase of his government, and of peace there will be no end. (Isa 9:6b–7)

Rest today in the One whose four great names bring all of his own real peace. And as you rest, let even greater hope be awakened in your soul, for the brilliance of Christ’s light gets even better!

The Coming of an Even Brighter Day

One day, the hope of dawn that propels us now will be gone––not because evil has won but because sunrise will have given way to eternal noon. Listen to the climax of God’s word in Revelation:

No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads.  And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever. (Rev 22:3–5)

Christ has come! Look, Church! Behold your God (Isa 40:9–11; cf. 25:9)! From the beginning of Scripture to the end we see him steadfastly committed to conquering the darkness!

Father, thank you for the dawn. Jesus, thank you for coming into our darkness. Please encourage the faint hearted and work for your children who need you. Let us walk as those who are in the light. Strengthen us with hope that we may also reflect your light to others. And come, Lord, quickly—I can’t wait to see your face.



A Symphonious Approach to Missions

By / Nov 30

Who’s On First?

When historians classify historical figures in terms of who was first to do something, even when the figures did not think of themselves by such classifications, sometimes the historical accounts can read like the famous Abbott and Costello skit, “Who’s on First?” This is very much the case with the ongoing conversation surrounding who was the first modern missionary or who should be termed the “Father of Modern Missions.”  Sometimes, these conversations sound, to me, like this:

Who was on the mission field first?

That’s what I am asking: who?

Exactly.

Exactly what?

What’s on second?

I thought Judson was second.

No, what’s on second. I don’t know is on third.

Who’s on first?

Exactly.

Who is on first, Liele or Carey?

Who’s on first. I don’t know Liele or Carey.

So you don’t know Liele, Carey, or who’s on third?

Who’s on first!

Ah!

Yet, what is taking place in this confused conversation about missions and history is important for it reveals that the entire story has not been told of who all helped propel Protestants to contribute to the growing task of global evangelism in the late 18th century. “Who’s first?” and “Why does it matter?”, are great questions to ask when assessing the history of missions, but I think we need further conversation about how we answer those questions.

Taking a shortcut to the end, I answer the “Who’s first?” question this way: George Liele (c. 1750-1820) was the first modern missionary, and it is right to consider William Carey (1761-1834) the father of modern missions, and Adoniram Judson (1788-1850) as the pioneer American missionary. However, to answer why it matters, I prefer to say more than just “Who’s on First.” Yes, who did what on which day is vital for understanding the historical task, but George Liele’s contribution is far greater than just that he was first, and I am afraid in historians’ helpful efforts to reclaim him, we’ve also limited him. And then there is the matter of how he, Carey, or, later, Judson considered themselves. What would they make of all these titles?

To help think about this further, I have found it helpful to review a brief background of the history of the beginnings of the modern missions movement in order to, then, suggest a new methodology for us to consider.

The Modern Missions Movement

From 1937 to 1945, church historian Kenneth Scott Latourette published his seven volume, A History of the Expansion of Christianity.  What is remarkable about this massive undertaking is that three of the volumes are dedicated just to the 1800s. Following Latourette’s emphasis and organization, Ralph Winter classified the history of Christian missions into epochs, the last of which covering 1800-2000, he titled “Modern Missions.”

What then is pre-modern missions, or, what happened to missions after the Reformation?

Following the Reformation, Protestants were slow to assemble any kind of organized missionary approach that would rival the Roman Catholic orders.  To be sure, the Reformers themselves, did engage in some global evangelism, but the movement could not yet sustain the transportation of churches or missionaries. In the seventeenth century, the German Pietist movement influenced Dutch Protestantism and shaped those sent as chaplains throughout their trading colonies. By the early eighteenth century, the Pietists shaped Count Nicolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf who gave refuge to persecuted Moravian Christians. This colony would awaken to the missionary task taking the gospel to the West Indies, Greenland, the Americas, South Africa, Egypt, and Tibet.

The Moravian effort coincided with the Great Awakening in England and America through John Wesley, who had some connection to the Pietists. In New England among the Puritans, there had been some cross-cultural work done among Native Americans by John Eliot and David Brainerd. Both the accounts of this expansion of the gospel as well as further development of the need for participation in global evangelism were fueled by the writing and ministry of Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, and the Awakening. As Protestants entered the nineteenth century, they organized their efforts in several mission societies and agencies to enable their churches to fund and send their missionaries.  Thus, as George Liele and William Carey were taking the gospel to other cultures in their respective parts of the world, they were doing so on the eve of what we know now as the modern missions movement.

The term “Father of Modern Missions” originated following William Carey’s death in an admiring biography by George Smith, The Life of William Carey (1885). Yet, had Carey been alive, he likely would have discouraged this assessment. When writing his Enquiry manifesto in 1792, he chronicled the spread of the gospel from the Apostle Paul to the Reformation. He then depicted the modern era by recognizing the work among Native Americans by Eliot, Brainerd, and Carey’s contemporaries, Mr. Kirkland and Mr. Sergeant. Carey included mention of mission work of the Dutch, and then lauded the work of the Moravian Brethren. Carey, it appears, knew he was taking up a baton of a movement already underway even as he organized and led a movement that would multiply itself and outlive him.

Yet, this is not to say that no one was aware of Liele’s contribution as the first Baptist missionary to cross-cultures with the gospel in Jamaica nine years prior to Carey. Many in England were aware due to the publication of Liele’s letters in John Rippon’s The Baptist Annual Register. While there is no evidence that Carey read The Register, there is a high likelihood that he did because of the notices about his own works that appeared at the same time. For The Register chronicled the first notice of the publication of Carey’s Enquiry in 1792, a notice concerning Carey’s ordination, and the minutes of the Northamptonshire Association that documented the formation of what would become the Baptist Mission Society.  These reports are interspersed in and around the ongoing correspondence of George Liele to John Rippon, local pastor and editor.

Adoniram Judson, then, serves as the pioneer American Baptist missionary given his role in helping to organize the Baptist Foreign Mission Board following his departure for Burma in 1812. However, sorting out the chronology, while helpful, limits a full appreciation for the full contribution to modern missions of Liele, Carey, and Judson. A symphonious approach is needed.

A Symphonious Approach

Among Baptist historians, there has been an ongoing methodological discussion about how one is to best interpret the Baptist tradition. Some have argued for a single source or “monogenesis” of great authority that anchors the Baptist tradition, which I argue in Baptists and the Christian Tradition, is largely an unhelpful contribution, especially as it finds expression in ultra-successionist forms. Most have, instead, acknowledged that there is a multi-source or “polygenesis” influence that comprises the Baptist tradition. Baptists are a product of the Reformation, yes, but their organization formation comes in England later, for example. In addition, another historian, William Brackney, has argued that a better way is to think of the various epochs of the Baptist movement is a genetic approach that sees continuity across streams of Baptist thought. This idea of searching for shared DNA, if you will, has merit, but I am afraid it sometimes loses theological precision.

What does this have to do with an assessment of the beginnings of the modern missions movement?  Instead of monogenesis, polygenesis, or a genetic approach, I present what I call a symphonious approach for assessing the modern missions movement. This era in history is, after all, a movement, and much like the musical use of that term, we see more similar themes: there are many diverse and complementary components that make up a symphony.  For the symphony to achieve its desired sound, all must play their part. Symphonies usually are comprised of four movements that each tell part of the story at different speeds and intensity.

For example, when considering the Protestant Reformation, historians and theologians do not speak often in terms of who was the first Reformer or who is the Father of the Reformation. Rather, those events and people in church history comprised a symphonic movement. Like its musical counterpart, it had a prelude in Wyclif and Hus, struck its opening notes with Luther, and saw its development and full deployment in Zwingli, Calvin, and Cranmer. Complementing these major sections were a host of other Reformers, social and cultural events, and advancements in technology and translation, that, in their contexts and specific convictions, added to the color and depth of the symphony that was the Reformation.

Likewise, I argue, it is with the modern missions movement. The Reformers themselves played some parts of the initial piece, but the Moravians and others open the overture in its beginning. George Liele, then, represents the first section with a unique and influential contribution that many have overlooked, yet he mobilized and impacted many. Carey, shaped by all who went before gives a full, well-organized presentation, the DNA of such serves a refrain for later movements that include Americans Adoniram and Ann Judson and many other missions societies, organizations, and work.

Thus, as far as titles and assessing the right chronology of the movement, I am arguing that it is more helpful to think of the modern missions movement like other movements in church history and to minimize the emphasis on titles in favor of assessing all the component parts and their unique contributions that serve to make up the movement as a whole. When historians and theologians analyze the modern missions movement in the ways they quantify other movements in the history of Christianity, seeing these leaders and each playing unique parts in one grand symphony appears to allow their voices and legacies to have appropriate appreciation and ongoing influence. To put it another way, a symphonious approach to assessing the missions movement allows current researchers to see the full value and beauty of what the movement’s leaders were able to do in their lifetimes, not to mention all the supporting figures and trends that helped to strengthen the movement that have yet to be studied and shared.

That said, I realize many historians might respond to my clarifications and say, “Enough already, I don’t care who is on first or how is the best way to put it all together, just as long as the missions movement and its overlooked figures are studied and shared.” I would agree with that bottom-line sentiment, but then, also would point out that, “I don’t care”-—well, he is the shortstop.



Links For the Church (11/29)

By / Nov 29

Why Your Church Needs Advent This Year

“By focusing our hearts on the first and second appearances of Jesus Christ, Advent is an opportunity to face up to the darkness in order to appreciate the light.”

7 Tips for Navigating Criticism as a Pastor

“Receiving criticism is part of pastoral ministry. Expect it and be ready to learn from so that you can grow in your walk with the Lord and in your service of the saints.”

Handling Our Differences Redemptively, Not Destructively

“Trying to wrap my head and heart around the divisiveness that has marked so much public discourse lately, I spent some valuable time pondering three messy relational scenarios described in the New Testament. Each situation highlights how we, who are perfectly loved by Jesus, don’t easily handle our differences very well.”

Indescribable: The Many Marvelous Names of Jesus

“His names, above all other names, are dear to us, because he is dear to us. Each provides a different angle, a different snapshot of what we can’t yet behold face-to-face. None overstate Christ.”

The Fundamental Mark of the Christian 

“The Christian has an unmistakable and unquestionable passion for God and the things of God. Christ is indeed his all, crown, and joy.”



Forgiven Altogether and Forever

By / Nov 27

“The forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.”
Ephesians 1:7

Could there be a sweeter word in any language than that word “forgiveness,” when it sounds in a guilty sinner’s ear, like the silver notes of jubilee to the captive Israelite? Blessed, forever blessed be that dear star of pardon which shines into the condemned cell, and gives the perishing a gleam of hope amid the midnight of despair! Can it be possible that sin, such sin as mine, can be forgiven, forgiven altogether, and forever? Hell is my portion as a sinner–there is no possibility of my escaping from it while sin remains upon me–can the load of guilt be uplifted, the crimson stain removed? Can the adamantine stones of my prison-house ever be loosed from their mortices, or the doors be lifted from their hinges? Jesus tells me that I may yet be clear. Forever blessed be the revelation of atoning love which not only tells me that pardon is possible, but that it is secured to all who rest in Jesus. I have believed in the appointed propitiation, even Jesus crucified, and therefore my sins are at this moment, and forever, forgiven by virtue of his substitutionary pains and death. What joy is this! What bliss to be a perfectly pardoned soul! My soul dedicates all her powers to him who of his own unpurchased love became my surety, and wrought out for me redemption through his blood. What riches of grace does free forgiveness exhibit! To forgive at all, to forgive fully, to forgive freely, to forgive forever! Here is a constellation of wonders; and when I think of how great my sins were, how dear were the precious drops which cleansed me from them, and how gracious was the method by which pardon was sealed home to me, I am in a maze of wondering worshipping affection. I bow before the throne which absolves me, I clasp the cross which delivers me, I serve henceforth all my days the Incarnate God, through whom I am this night a pardoned soul.