Category Archives: The Church

The Incarnation: Miracle, Majesty, and Mission

Posted on by
Reply

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.  John 1:14

I want to briefly look at the incarnation from a slightly different perspective this Christmas and I hope that it is a benefit to you, particularly in the way you understand and live out the missio Dei. It will help if you understand one of the central presuppositions to my theological method. In his work, According to Plan, Graeme Goldsworthy, commenting on Genesis 1, explains, “There is no suggestion of a self-evident standard of goodness and harmony outside of God . . . God, who is the source of both, must define them by setting forth an arrangement that is the expression of his goodness and harmony” (93). When God declares the creation to be good He is in fact declaring its conformity to and expression of His intrinsic goodness. As such I would understand all theological study, from hamartiology to ecclesiology, to be a study of the attributes of God, as He has seen fit to reveal them. For example, by studying soteriology we can see the sovereignty and gracious disposition of God. With that said my primary concern here is to briefly examine what the incarnation reveals about the character of God, particularly as it pertains to the missio Dei.

The incarnation demonstrates the unmatched sovereignty of God as He brings His plans to fruition and His purposes to pass (Genesis 3:15; Micah 5:2; Acts 4:24-28).

The incarnation demonstrates the humility of God (Philippians 2:5-11) lest we read this verse and think that humility is merely a character trait of Christ and not the entire Trinitarian community it is important to note the definitive other centeredness of God; God the Father has given Christ “a name that is above every name” (Philippians 2:9), God the Son glorified God the Father (John 17:1-5), and it is through God the Spirit that we worship God the Father and the Son (Philippians 3:3).

The incarnation demonstrates the immeasurable and lavish grace of God (Ephesians 1:4-15). Concomitant with grace is God’s longsuffering patience (I Timothy 1:15-16).

The incarnation demonstrates that God is a relational being; this is seen in both Christ’s numerous prayers to the Father (Mark 1:35; 6:46; 14:32ff.) and in His relationship with His disciples, family, and friends (John 2:2, 11, 12; 11:1-44).

The incarnation defines the missio Dei as Christ declares, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you” (John 20:21; see also Luke 19:10; John 13:31-32; 17:1-5). This is a profound statement and one that has not received due consideration at that. Just as God the Father has sent Christ so He also sends His Church. This is a clarion call for the modern church to rethink both its theology and methodology. Indeed, it is a call to not only an incarnational Christology but an incarnational ecclesiology/missiology as well!

There are those who would argue against such an incarnational ecclesiology claiming that it diminishes the theological significance of the incarnation of Christ. Would we say the same thing of Paul? Would we argue that II Corinthians 5:18-21 diminishes reconciliation? Not in the least. Rather, we would rejoice that just as “in Christ God was reconciling the world to Himself” now, as ambassadors, as representatives, as mediators sent on behalf of Christ, God is “making his appeal through us.” Do you grasp the significance of the incarnation and an incarnational ecclesiology as it pertains to our ministry of reconciliation? Christ who, “in his body of flesh by his death” reconciled us to God (Romans 5:10; Colossians 1:21-22) now sends the church so that through her God may make His appeal. In the same way the church incarnates, gives flesh to, the sufferings of Christ as Paul both exclaims (Colossians 1:24-29) and promises (Romans 8:17; II Corinthians 1:5; Philippians 1:29-30) and the author of Hebrews exhorts (Hebrews 13:11-14). In the same way we see that Epaphroditus gives flesh to the service and love of the church at Philippi (Philippians 2:25-30).

So let us rejoice at the incarnation and rejoice even more that God has not left the world without a physical witness but that He continues to make His appeal and reveal Christ’s sufferings through His church, whom He has sent just as He sent His Son.

Dead Orthodoxy — Dead Orthopraxy

Posted on by
7

Lately I have been thinking about the easy-believism that is so prevalent in American churches and their general disconnect between faith and practice. I generally see this occurring on two fronts, each of which is equally dangerous, yet one has been largely ignored as of late.

A Dead Orthopraxy

The first front is made up of liberals and emergents; theirs is a gospel that radically alters the lifestyles of those who embrace it yet it ultimately lacks sufficient doctrinal content to truly be considered a biblical gospel. While they may in many senses be considered orthodox in praxis this movement’s impetus is a set of social concerns and not the life-giving gospel of Jesus Christ and as such their orthopraxy is a dead one. To phrase it simpler their gospel restructures their lifestyle yet it fails to transform their belief structure. This movement has received prolific critique lately and as such it is not the focus of this post. If you are unfamiliar with the emergent church then I would recommend the following link (here).

A Dead Orthodoxy

The second front has largely been ignored recently and as such presents a far subtler danger. This second front is comprised of some conservatives and fundamentalists; theirs is a gospel that radically alters the doctrinal beliefs of those who embrace it yet it ultimately lacks sufficient doctrinal content to truly be considered a biblical gospel. While they may in many senses be considered orthodox in belief this movement’s impetus is a set of truth claims and not the life-giving gospel of Jesus Christ and as such their orthodoxy is a dead one. Again, to phrase is simpler their gospel restructures their belief structure yet it fails to transform their lifestyle. While these churches will affirm the basic tenets of “the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” their conduct argues to the contrary. I think several examples of this will suffice to prove my point.

  • They deny the manifold glory of God by failing to teach and laboring to learn the deep things of God (Mark 12:30; II Peter 3:16-18)
  • They deny the lordship of Christ by endorsing the salvation of countless voluntarily inactive members (Hebrews 10:25).
  • They deny the sanctifying work of the Spirit by failing to discipline members in sin (Matthew 18:15-17; I Corinthians 6:9-12).
  • They deny the efficacy and infallibility of the Scriptures (Isaiah 55:10-11) by failing to shepherd the flock (I Peter 5:1-5) and by refusing to engage in biblical counseling and “referring” their church members to secular psychologists (II Timothy 3:16-17).
  • They deny the fundamental essence of the church by allowing inactive and sinning members to continue in membership (I Peter 2:9).
  • They deny the interdependent nature of the church by failing to exhort the congregation to hold one another accountable (I Corinthians 12:12-13; Colossians 3:16).

These churches have been given a pass for far too long. Their verbal assent to the doctrines of Scripture apart from the proper practice thereof is far more than institutionalized hypocrisy, it is a false gospel.

The Gravity of Gospel Ministry

Posted on by
6

Today I had the privilege of attending the ordination council of a close friend. I have been to ordination services before and I have had friends who have been ordained; however, this was completely unique among those experiences. Unlike other ordination services I was deeply impressed as this ordination conveyed the sobriety with which one must approach gospel ministry.

Providence Community Church is committed to preserving the purity of the ministry and as such the interview was profoundly thorough. The elders of Providence Community Church, along with a pastor of another local church and a professor from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, conducted the interview. Recognizing that the local church exists beyond the congregation at Providence they invited these other ordained men, from other likeminded local churches, to take part in the interview to maintain the purity of the body of Christ in Lexington as well. Furthermore, they invited the church to attend as the congregation also needs to recognize and endorse this man’s calling to gospel ministry, which is why I was able to be there.

I cannot overemphasize the thoroughness of the interview process. It was thorough, extremely thorough, to the point that it required nearly five hours to complete. It began as he shared his testimony and calling to gospel ministry from there it proceeded to his doctrinal defense. He was required to type a defense of the church’s doctrinal statement in advance, a rather lengthy defense at that, and submit it to the ordained men who would be conducting the interview. The questions ranged from various worldview and missiological implications to his understanding of the filioque clause and kenosis. I even remembered one point where Augustine was quoted in Latin.

The local church benefits from such attention to detail and thoroughness in maintaining a pure ministry. The church also benefits by networking and expecting accountability from other local likeminded churches. Moreover, the kindhearted and deeply theological nature of this interview was a profound benefit to the church as well; it was as if they were able to attend a weekend seminary course in systematic theology. In contrast to pop Christianity where theology is downplayed, and often outright demised, these events have been a refreshing encouragement, which I hope takes root in other churches as well.

Make Disciples not Programs

Posted on by
Reply

This week The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary began their first ever Great Commission Lecture Series; there are several more lectures to come please check that link for updates over the next month.  Starting the series off was David Platt, lead pastor of the Church at Brook Hills in Birmingham, Alabama.  In his lecture he offered the following criticism of the lack of biblical vision in SBC churches and followed it up will a practical exhortation to recover the mission of God.

“When you ask a pastor to describe his vision and we say things like, ‘my vision is to have this many hundred or this many thousand people in church, or to have this many buildings,’ when we say things like that we show that somewhere along the way we have lost our pursuit of Christ in the pursuit of stuff and the church. Christ should be our vision. . . .  One of the greatest challenges that I, and the staff that I lead, face is trying to reorient our thinking: the purpose of the staff is not to plan events or to provide services. The purpose of the staff, of church leaders, is to equip people, to build people, to love Christ and proclaim the glory of Christ to the nations” (emphasis added).

An article by the Towers Online is available here and MP3s of the lectures are available below.

·         “The Presence of Christ in the Great Commission”

·         “The Command of Christ in the Great Commission”

·         “The Authority of Christ in the Great Commission”

Not Many of You Should Become Teachers

Posted on by
1

If there is one text of Scripture that I here poorly exegeted, in the name of preserving sound exegesis, more than any other it is James 3:1; which reads,

“Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.”

I have heard numerous individuals and pastors encourage others and their churches not to become teachers because of the damage and subsequent judgment that an unbridled tongue will incur.  But is that the meaning of this text?  Are these pastors, who claim to use a literal, historical, grammatical, contextual, redemptive hermeneutic, exercising sound hermeneutical principles as they derive this application of the text?  Is their proposed meaning of this text, “not many should become teachers,” really the meaning of this text?  I think not.

I had originally wanted to take the time to walk through the whole of chapter three; however, after typing endlessly I felt it best to offer only a brief synopsis.  If you would like more information I would gladly leave it in a comment.

James 3

Historical Context

While it is located near the end of the New Testament, it is actually the first New Testament book written.  James, the half-brother of Jesus and a leader in the Jerusalem church (Galatians 2:9) wrote the letter to Jews scattered as a result of persecution (Acts 8; 12).  The letter’s failure to mention the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), which addressed various issues concerning Gentile believer, means that it was written before that council.  Subsequently, the book of James is thoroughly Jewish in character.  Because of this much that is said here must be examined on two levels; first, the language and the meaning it bore within a Jewish cultural context and second, the meaning which these terms came to bear within the church.

A Paul works among the Gentiles who do not share a common theological heritage with him; he must establish patterns of right thinking so that patterns of right acting can flow from them, which is why many of Paul’s epistles are viewed primarily as doctrinal treatises.  James, on the other hand, is writing to Jews, partakers of the covenants of promise, who all share a common theological heritage and therefore his concern is right practice.  This is why James 4:17 reads, “So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin” because right thinking is assumed and their failure is one of practice.

Synopsis

“1Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive a more intensive judgment” (italics my translation).

The theme throughout this text is teaching; using this text to address gossip or other issues is pure eisegesis and should not be tolerated.  The opening admonition sets the tone for everything that follows.  At the outset of this admonition several things are immediately clear.  By the use of “my brothers” James is clearly speaking to believers, albeit immature ones as will be evident later, furthermore it is clear that even the teaching of the apostles will be judged (I Corinthians 3:10-15).  Interestingly enough the word for judgment that is used here is a neutral word that is often used to describe the process of a legal suit where the outcome may be positive or negative; condemnation or reward.

“2For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.”

There are two prominent ways in which this verse has been understood.  First, it can be understood as a hypothetical situation in which James describes the perfect or ideal individual who has both subjugated his speech and conduct and is self-controlled in all he does.  Obviously all but Christ would fall miserably short of this ideal and thus James has both grabbed our attention and demonstrated our need for sanctification of both speech and conduct.  Secondly, it has been understood in terms of spiritual maturity.  The word used for perfect is teleios (τέλειος); this is the word from which the English word teleology, the study of ultimate purpose or ends, is derived.  If understood in this sense the text then addresses spiritual completeness/maturity as one who demonstrates his maturity by right speech will likewise demonstrate his maturity by right conduct as well.

Which of these interpretations of this text fits best within the context of this epistle?

Clearly within the book as a whole the emphasis would rest on the latter interpretation as James focuses heavily on spiritual maturity and the practical application of truth.  Within the immediate context a similar emphasis must be noted.  In the immediate verses that follow (v.3-12) James illustrates how if one can control the tongue he can control the rest of his members as well as the tongue’s destructive potential.

13Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.

Wisdom and understanding were critical within Jewish culture.  Wisdom denotes the correct application of knowledge while understanding carries the connotation of using knowledge effectively, as one would know a trade or skill.  Combined they speak of one who can correctly and effectively make use of knowledge.  The heart of James’ request is that the wise and understanding individual should demonstrate his wisdom and understanding not by his speech but by his works, his correct and effective use of his knowledge.  In the verses that follow (v.14-18) James compares and contrasts false and true wisdom, demonstrating that godly wisdom bears fruit.

Conclusion

From this one can gather that James is writing to spiritually immature Jewish followers of Christ whose are living hypocritically as they boast of their wisdom and yet fail to demonstrate it by their lifestyle; theirs is a dead and workless faith.  Now that we have looked at what the text says it is important to note what the text does not say.  James is not writing to admonish followers of Christ and to persuade them against becoming teachers; such an admonition is directed only at the spiritually immature.

To the spiritually mature; however, Scripture provides a unanimous and contrary exhortation, extolling the spiritually mature, the wise and understanding, to become teachers.  Scripture as a whole argues for a church comprised of teachers.  Regarding the leadership/offices within the local church Scripture argues for a plurality of teaching elders (Acts 14:23, 21:18; Titus 1:5; James 5:14), men marked by self-control, discipline, doctrinal soundness, blamelessness, respect, and hospitality (I Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:6-9).  In Ephesians 4:11-13 we see that the teacher is a specific office given that the saints may be equipped for the work of the ministry.  Beyond these specific offices Scripture paints a picture of the church as an interdependent body comprised of various members who teach one another.  Ephesians 5:19-20 and Colossians 3:16 describe a church where individuals teach and admonish one another using songs of various kinds.  Titus 2 describes the teaching role of various members of the church, even the teaching role of women, a role that is further described in I Timothy 2:15.  Above all Paul even exclaims, “If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task” (I Timothy 3:1).  Rather than seeing an argument in Scripture against the proliferation of teachers within the church we see a consistent exhortation towards such an end, so long as they hold to sound doctrine and bear fruit in keeping with repentance.