“Do nothing that you would not like God to see. Say nothing you would not like God to hear. Go no place where you would not like God to find you. Never spend your time in such a way that you would not like God to say, ‘What are you doing?'” ~ J.C. Ryle

A few days ago,Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church posted on twitter the following:

Pastor warren was referring to a 1 May article Dr. Mohler posted online 1 May asking the question “Is the Megachurch the New Liberalism?”

I read the article the day it was posted to Dr. Mohler’s blog and found it both insightful and thought provoking. A brief summary of the megachurch movement highlighted many positive contributions of conservative megachurches before it presented two issues that illustrate how liberalism in American society has affected some churches; the issues of divorce and homosexuality.

Concerning divorce, Dr. Mohler has this to say:

By and large, the story of evangelical Christianity in the United States since the advent of legal no-fault divorce has been near total capitulation. This is certainly true of the megachurches, but it is unfair to single them out in this failure. The reality is that the “Old First Church” and smaller congregational models were fully complicit — and for the same basic reason. Holding to strict biblical teachings on divorce is extremely costly. For the megachurches, the threat was being called judgmental, and the perceived danger of failing to reach the burgeoning numbers of divorced persons inhabiting metropolitan areas. For smaller churches the issue was the same, though usually more intimate. Divorced persons were more likely to have family members and friends within the congregation who were reluctant to confront the issue openly. Church discipline disappeared and personal autonomy reigned triumphant.

He then asked whether the same thing is happening concerning the issue of homosexuality, using as an example a recently delivered sermon at a church in Alpharetta, GA. In Dr. Mohler’s own words:

A shot now reverberating around the evangelical world was fired by Atlanta megachurch pastor Andy Stanley in recent days. Preaching at North Point Community Church, in a sermon series known as “Christian,” Stanley preached a message titled “When Gracie Met Truthy” on April 15, 2012. With reference to John 1:14, Stanley described the challenge of affirming grace and truth in full measure. He spoke of grace and truth as a tension, warning that “if you resolve it, you give up something important.”

. . .in the most intense part of his message, Stanley told the congregation an account meant to illustrate his message. He told of a couple with a young daughter who divorced when the wife discovered that the husband was in a sexual relationship with another man. The woman then insisted that her former husband and his gay partner move to another congregation. They did move, but to another North Point location, where they volunteered together as part of a “host team.”

The story took a strange turn when Stanley then explained that he had learned that the former husband’s gay partner was still married. Stanley then explained that the partner was actually committing adultery, and that the adultery was incompatible with his service on a host team. Stanley told the two men that they could not serve on the host team so long as the one man was still married. He later told of the former wife’s decision not to live in bitterness, and of her initiative to bring the whole new family structure to a Christmas service. This included the woman, her daughter, her former husband, his gay partner, and his daughter. Stanley celebrated this new “modern family” as an expression of forgiveness.

The inescapable impression left by the account was that the sin of concern was adultery, but not homosexuality. Stanley clearly and repeatedly stressed the sin of adultery, but then left the reality of the homosexual relationship between the two men unaddressed as sin. To the contrary, he seemed to normalize their relationship.

That’s the ‘shot heard round the world’ and the indication that the current liberal view of homosexuality invading American culture had penetrated this particular megachurch. Sadly, this is not the only church that no longer takes a Biblical stance concerning the issue of homosexuality, much as many no longer hold to a Biblical stance concerning marriage, it’s sanctity and the protection thereof.

You see, Dr. Mohler indeed asked an important question. He in no way questioned the orthodoxy of megachurches in general because of their size, as Rick Warren alleged in his Twitter tweet. I’d say that it’s Rick Warren who might owe an apology to Dr. Mohler! I also would have thought an allegation so spurious, and easily seen so by an intelligent reader, beneath such a renowned Pastor. I’m confident that there are quite a few megachurches who share Rick Warren’s sentiment, but it would be far better if they would perhaps undergo a bit of Biblical self-examination, and certainly much more profitable for the church.

I would highly recommend reading Dr. Mohler’s post, whether or not you give credence to Rick Warren’s demand for an unnecessary apology. In fact, as far as I’m concerned it’s an urgent must read. When extending grace means compromising truth, the church is in serious trouble.

At a seminar I gave last week, I used the tried and true method when facing a crowd outside of my usual comfort zone.   Three points nobody could disagree with, a fourth point that might have raised some eyebrows and a fifth that sounded downright heretical. Always good for waking up the back row at the end of a long lecture. The fifth was simply this: the gospel is not sufficient to ensure the continuation of the gospel.

The point is one which emerges clearly from the life and thought of Martin Luther.  Luther is interesting for a whole number of reasons but one of the most important is for his understanding of the times in which he lived.  That is key to seeing why he is different at numerous points from other reformers.  

Luther was heir to the acute sense of end-time expectation that one finds in the late medieval church.  For him, the Reformation was the recovery of the gospel at the end of time and he clearly expected it to carry all before it.   Thus, in 1520 (perhaps the year in which he seems to have had greatest confidence in public in his message) his language brims with confidence.   The Babylonian captivity of the church can be ended, the shackles by which the papacy has bound the Empire can be shattered and Christians can be truly free.   Just let the Word loose and all will be well.   

By 1525, of course, the picture starts to look bleaker: Protestantism is beginning to fracture; the protagonists in the Peasants’ War appropriate the democratizing language of Luther’s theological revolution and turn it into the battle cry of violent social upheaval; and the simple declaration of the gospel is becoming mired in the quicksands of human affairs.   From 1525 onwards, one must search hard for the language of universal priesthood in the writings of Luther (or many other reformers for that matter).  The gospel on its own without careful attention to the kind of structural context advocated by Paul, could quickly be appropriated by the chaotic and sinful ambitions of fallen human beings.  Thus, from 1525 onwards, Luther drops the ambiguously democratic rhetoric and start to talk more of church order and offices.

This insufficiency of he gospel is surely why Paul, when writing to Timothy, does not simply tell him to preach the gospel.   Yes, he certainly does tell him  that; but as the aging apostle looks at the world around him and wonders how the gospel is to be preserved after the first generation of leaders directly commissioned by Christ dies out, he also tells Timothy to find ordinary men to appoint as elders.   In other words, Paul sees that a church structure, as well as a church message, is vital to the safeguarding and propagation of the gospel.

For Paul, the gospel is not in itself sufficient to ensure the continuation of the gospel.  It needs men to preach it; it needs men, women and children to tell it to their friends.  And because all of these agents are fallen, it needs a church structure to help to safeguard its content.

This is not to say that preaching the gospel is rocket science.   One error we can make is to assume that only a few, highly skilled individuals can preach the gospel.   The world is full of very good gospel preachers who, for one reason or another, nobody has ever heard of beyond their local congregations. I enjoyed T4G last week but (without any disrespect to the men who spoke at the plenaries) I can name a dozen men who are just as fine at gospel exposition but who will never be on a giant stage or preach to more than a maximum of a few hundred people — often much fewer — on a Sunday .  Preaching is not an arcane skill given only to a score or men worldwide.   If it were, Paul would have told us.  In fact, he does not say to Timothy, ‘Find a few highly skilled men with media clout and hand the matter over to them.’  Not at all.  What he essentially says is ‘Find men in your congregation who are trustworthy and true who, if they have families, have run their households well, who have a good track record within the church, who are respected by outsiders and who are competent to teach – and trust them with the gospel.’

____________________

Online Source: Reformation 21

“Salvation is wholly of grace; not only undeserved , but undesired by us, till He is pleased to awaken us to a sense of our need of it. And then we find everything prepared that our wants require, or our wishes conceive; yea, that he has done exceedingly beyond what we could either ask or think. Salvation is wholly of the Lord, and bears those signatures of infinite wisdom, power, and goodness, which distinguish all his works from the puny imitations of men. It is every way worthy of Himself, a great, a free, a full, a sure salvation. It is great, whether we consider the objects, miserable and hell-deserving sinners; the end, the restoration of such alienated creatures to his image and favor, to immortal life and happiness; or the means, the incarnation, humiliation, sufferings, and death of his beloved Son. It is free, without exception of persons, or cases, without any conditions or qualifications, but such as he himself performs in them, and bestows upon them.” – John Newton (1725-1807)

Jesus said to them (the Jewish audience), “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:35-40 ESV)

We have nestled in the above passage from John, Chapter 6 two declarations by Jesus concerning a group of people ‘given’ to the Son by the Father; those given to the Son by the Father will come, and having come, they will never be cast out.

Note that the passage does not say “When those the Father gives me come to me, I will receive them,” it merely says that “all those the Father gives me will come.” The certainty of that coming is amplified by Jesus saying in v. 40 that those who believe (come) will be raised up on the last day.

In researching a lot of different study Bibles and commentaries, I discovered that there seems to be very strong consensus by theologians through the centuries that there is indeed a group of people given to the Son by the Father, who will be saved. I won’t cite all of those references here, but leave it up to the reader to discover them. All that research really only means that the passages mean exactly what they say.

What that passage presents the reader are some very interesting and important questions:

Who make up this group of people the Father gives the Son? If all of them come to Christ and are saved, it can’t mean that God gives everyone to the Son (universal salvation) because we know from the scriptures that some folks don’t receive eternal life, but they receive everlasting punishment (Matt 25:46).

Are there any who receive eternal life who are not given by the Father to the Son, that some come all on their own? If that’s the case, why would the Father ‘give’ anyone to the Son?

If only those that the Father ‘gives’ the Son are saved, what about those not given?

What all is involved in the ‘giving’ by God and the ‘coming’ of those given?

What does it mean that those who come will never be cast out?

I’m not offering answers in this post, just the questions. Do I have answers? Yes, and some might even be the right answers, but that’s not the point. I think we need to wrestle with the questions on our own and let the Bible speak.

They are not simple ‘fill in the blank’ questions, but some of the answers can ‘rock your theology’.

Be blessed!

The word “gospel” means good news, and it is best defined as the message of forgiveness for sin through the atoning work of Jesus Christ. It is essentially God’s rescue plan of redemption for those who will trust in His divine Son in order to be reconciled to a just and holy God. The essential content of this saving message is clearly laid out for us in the Bible.

In the Apostle Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, he lays out the content of the gospel message, “Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).

In this passage, we see three essential elements of the gospel message. First, the phrase “died for our sins” is very important. As Romans 3:23 tells us, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” The reality of sin needs to be acknowledged by all who approach the throne of God for salvation. A sinner must acknowledge the hopelessness of his guilt before God in order for forgiveness to take place, and he must understand that the “wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). Without this foundational truth, no gospel presentation is complete.

Second, the person and work of Christ are indispensable components of the gospel. Jesus is both God (Colossians 2:9) and man (John 1:14). Jesus lived the sinless life that we could never live (1 Peter 2:22) and, as such, He is the only one who could die a substitutionary death for the sinner. Sin against an infinite God requires an infinite sacrifice. Therefore, either man, who is finite, must pay the penalty for an infinite length of time in hell, or the infinite Christ must pay for it once. Jesus went to the cross to pay the debt we owe to God for our sin and those who are covered by His sacrifice will inherit the kingdom of God as sons of the king (John 1:12).

Third, the resurrection of Christ is an essential element of the gospel. The resurrection is the proof of the power of God. Only He who created life can resurrect it after death, only He can reverse the hideousness that is death itself, and only He can remove the sting that is death and the victory that is the grave’s (1 Corinthians 15:54-55). Further, unlike all other religions, Christianity alone possesses a Founder who transcends death and who promises that His followers will do the same. All other religions were founded by men and prophets whose end was the grave.

Finally, Christ offers His salvation as a free gift (Romans 5:15; 6:23), that can only be received by faith, apart from any works or merit on our part (Ephesians 2:8-9). As the Apostle Paul tells us, the gospel is “…the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile” (Romans 1:16). The same inspired author tells us, “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9).

These, then, are the essential elements of the gospel: the sin of all men, the death of Christ on the cross to pay for those sins, the resurrection of Christ to provide life everlasting for those who follow Him, and the offer of the free gift of salvation to all.

Recommended Resource: Faith Alone: The Evangelical Doctrine of Justification by R.C. Sproul.

At the recent Shepherd’s Conference, one of the presentations was called “The Way(s) Of the Master”, by Pastor Jesse Johnson. The audio is available here  should you want to listen to it. A written critique of the Way of the Master Law based evangelism model, also by by Pastor Johnson, is available here. Ray Comfort’s response to Pastor Johnson’s critique is available here.

With all that out of the way (pointers to articles for the incurably curious), let’s get back to the subject of ‘one size fits all’ evangelism. First of all, what do we mean by ‘one size fits all’ evangelism? Simply put, we mean a single method of evangelizing/sharing the message of the gospel that fits every possible evangelistic encounter/divine appointment.

The Way of the Master (WOTM) method is presented here as an example, and it has been presented as a the method used for all audiences by it’s founder. He (Ray Comfort) has gone on record as saying that he would use the exact same method witnessing to anyone and everyone. There are other methods that are sometimes touted as the way, the best way, or simply a method that works. I don’t think I need to name them. The fact that any one of them is claimed to be the way , the best way, or even a way that works is what might be problematic.

I find no specific method of evangelism that is described as fitting any of those categories. If you find one, please let me know. The way, the best way, a way that works are man invented categories. We believe that the content of the message should b e our primary concern:

Does the message we share focus on the problem of sin?

When we address the issue of sin, do we also discuss the need for true repentance?

Does our message include ‘counting the cost’ of becoming a Christian?

Is our message man-centered or God centered?

I really don’t know if Way of the Master Ministries considers using the Decalogue as the way of Biblical evangelism. When one one observes the ministry however, one can come to that assumption. I would like to see WOTM ministries make a clear statement that they are not advocating using the Decalogue as the way of evangelism.

Perhaps Pastor Johnson could have placed more emphasis on the ‘one size fits all’ theme rather than single out WOTM . If he had, Perhaps Ray COmfort would not have felt the need to come across as defensively as he did.

In the end however, what I would have likde to see is not very relevant. That we remain true to the message of the Gospel is.

Food for thought. Be blessed!