Found at The Sacred Sandwich.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
The Lost Art of Preaching...
In today's world of topical sermons and seeker-sensitive attitudes, one would wonder how someone like John Calvin or Charles Spurgeon would fare in our day. I think one of the biggest problems facing the church today is it's drive to change the way the message is being presented. All for the sake of being relative.
I do believe the church should be able to speak a language that the culture understands. I dislike attending a service that stresses the need for the "anointing" or if the preacher uses words like "regeneration" without explaining the meanings of those words for the unbelievers in the audience. I think sometimes we speak a "Christianese" that no one else understands.
Preaching itself should not change. Many churches want to turn the sermon into "story hour" at the church or maybe eliminate it altogether in favor of dramas or poetry readings. I am not against the use of any of these mediums in the service. BUT, I am NOT in favor of replacing the sermon with any of these.
The other issue, which I think is just as deadly, that is infiltrating our churches is the fact that preachers almost never preach through a book of the bible any more, instead they preach on topics. Topics range from love to kindness to prayer to the end times. Now I am not saying the bible does touch on all of these topics, but the problem is that preachers are picking the topics and picking 10 verses to support said topic and then delivering messages on that topic that may or may not align with the whole word of God.
Here's a common example: I recently heard a preacher on the radio preaching on love. This is a popular topic. He picked some verses out of the bible (including every preachers standby in 1 Cor. 13) and then proceeded to explain what love is. It is patient, kind, etc. You get the point. The problem was not that this was not biblical. The problem came in what he didn't say. He never mentioned got around to speaking about true love which is God. He never mentioned the atoning work of Christ on the cross. He never explained the good news. He went on to challenge his congregation to "love more" and the love their neighbors better and to love God better.
Most of you can see the problem in this already. We preach love, equip them to love, send them out the door to love and they fail. Why? They get outside in the church parking lot, the husband gets mad at the wife and the next thing you know, love is thrown out the window. Love is not something that we can "do better". It is a fruit. In order to truly love, the way God intends for us to love, we must have a change in nature. Repentance must come first along with the forgiveness of sins in the name of Jesus before one can love like that. God must regenerate your heart. This all could have been explained in the sermon, but that might have offended someone. So it was left out.
I heard someone describe it this way. You have to grow a beard. You don't just decide to have one. I tried to have one a 12. It didn't happen. No matter how hard I tried, the beard just didn't grow. Now, I could have went out and taped one on. It would have looked like a had a beard, but upon close inspection everyone would have known it was a fake. The same is with love. It is something that grows from your relationship with Christ. You can go out and tape some love on, but in the end, people will know that it is fake and when they see the heart hasn't been changed.
Sometimes we need to rediscover our roots. Great preachers like Calvin did not preach very many topical sermons. Instead he preached directly from the text. He went through entire books of the bible. He did not skip around like modern day preachers do. He instead devoted his life to proclaiming the word, in the way God said it. He preached directly from the Hebrew and Greek. He spoke very simply and instructed his people in a way they could understand.
According to S.J. Cole, who wrote an essay on John Calvin here, Calvin would preach an average of 170 sermons a year. This is far more than the average of 50 to 100 for most American pastors. Calvin preached two different sermons on Sunday, as well as one sermon every day of the week, every other week (at 6 or 7 am depending on the time of the year). He preached 189 sermons straight through the book of Acts, which took him five years to accomplish. He preached 5 sermons of the one chapter of Obadiah, 25 sermons on the 5 chapters of Lamentations, 123 sermons on the book of Genesis, and so on. This is in conjunction with everything else he did, including the writing of The Institutes of the Christian Religion and lecturing pastoral students three times a day every week that he wasn't preaching every day.
Calvin suffered from many physical problems during this time as well: impaired digestion (he only ate one meal a day), migraines, lung hemorrhages, perhaps tuberculosis, chronic asthma, kidney stones, hemorrhoids, frequent fever, and gout. Even with all these issues, he still managed to preach the word.
A Few Key Points on Preaching
1 - Preach expositionally. This is very important. We should be in awe of God and his power and might and never seek to promote our own agenda from the pulpit. Topical sermons tend to promote one's own ideas about God, but not God himself. Let God do the speaking.
2 - Preach Jesus in every text. Jesus is found throughout the Bible. If we ever loose sight of him, we have lost sight of everything. Everything we do should be about Jesus. Period.
3 - Preach humbly. If we truly understand who we are, wretched sinners, then we will preach accordingly. Paul says he was the chief of sinners, yet his messages are still effective because it was not his message, but God speaking directly to the hearts of man.
4 - Preach repentance and forgiveness. One without the other will not do. We must have both. Some churches focus on one without the other. We must endeavor to preach both and do it constantly.
5 - Preach to refute false teaching. Our world is littered with false teaching. Some churches have chosen to ignore it. Others have indeed promoted it themselves. We need to endeavor to preach to the true gospel and make sure we point out the false ones.
I do believe the church should be able to speak a language that the culture understands. I dislike attending a service that stresses the need for the "anointing" or if the preacher uses words like "regeneration" without explaining the meanings of those words for the unbelievers in the audience. I think sometimes we speak a "Christianese" that no one else understands.
Preaching itself should not change. Many churches want to turn the sermon into "story hour" at the church or maybe eliminate it altogether in favor of dramas or poetry readings. I am not against the use of any of these mediums in the service. BUT, I am NOT in favor of replacing the sermon with any of these.
The other issue, which I think is just as deadly, that is infiltrating our churches is the fact that preachers almost never preach through a book of the bible any more, instead they preach on topics. Topics range from love to kindness to prayer to the end times. Now I am not saying the bible does touch on all of these topics, but the problem is that preachers are picking the topics and picking 10 verses to support said topic and then delivering messages on that topic that may or may not align with the whole word of God.
Here's a common example: I recently heard a preacher on the radio preaching on love. This is a popular topic. He picked some verses out of the bible (including every preachers standby in 1 Cor. 13) and then proceeded to explain what love is. It is patient, kind, etc. You get the point. The problem was not that this was not biblical. The problem came in what he didn't say. He never mentioned got around to speaking about true love which is God. He never mentioned the atoning work of Christ on the cross. He never explained the good news. He went on to challenge his congregation to "love more" and the love their neighbors better and to love God better.
Most of you can see the problem in this already. We preach love, equip them to love, send them out the door to love and they fail. Why? They get outside in the church parking lot, the husband gets mad at the wife and the next thing you know, love is thrown out the window. Love is not something that we can "do better". It is a fruit. In order to truly love, the way God intends for us to love, we must have a change in nature. Repentance must come first along with the forgiveness of sins in the name of Jesus before one can love like that. God must regenerate your heart. This all could have been explained in the sermon, but that might have offended someone. So it was left out.
I heard someone describe it this way. You have to grow a beard. You don't just decide to have one. I tried to have one a 12. It didn't happen. No matter how hard I tried, the beard just didn't grow. Now, I could have went out and taped one on. It would have looked like a had a beard, but upon close inspection everyone would have known it was a fake. The same is with love. It is something that grows from your relationship with Christ. You can go out and tape some love on, but in the end, people will know that it is fake and when they see the heart hasn't been changed.
Sometimes we need to rediscover our roots. Great preachers like Calvin did not preach very many topical sermons. Instead he preached directly from the text. He went through entire books of the bible. He did not skip around like modern day preachers do. He instead devoted his life to proclaiming the word, in the way God said it. He preached directly from the Hebrew and Greek. He spoke very simply and instructed his people in a way they could understand.
According to S.J. Cole, who wrote an essay on John Calvin here, Calvin would preach an average of 170 sermons a year. This is far more than the average of 50 to 100 for most American pastors. Calvin preached two different sermons on Sunday, as well as one sermon every day of the week, every other week (at 6 or 7 am depending on the time of the year). He preached 189 sermons straight through the book of Acts, which took him five years to accomplish. He preached 5 sermons of the one chapter of Obadiah, 25 sermons on the 5 chapters of Lamentations, 123 sermons on the book of Genesis, and so on. This is in conjunction with everything else he did, including the writing of The Institutes of the Christian Religion and lecturing pastoral students three times a day every week that he wasn't preaching every day.
Calvin suffered from many physical problems during this time as well: impaired digestion (he only ate one meal a day), migraines, lung hemorrhages, perhaps tuberculosis, chronic asthma, kidney stones, hemorrhoids, frequent fever, and gout. Even with all these issues, he still managed to preach the word.
A Few Key Points on Preaching
1 - Preach expositionally. This is very important. We should be in awe of God and his power and might and never seek to promote our own agenda from the pulpit. Topical sermons tend to promote one's own ideas about God, but not God himself. Let God do the speaking.
2 - Preach Jesus in every text. Jesus is found throughout the Bible. If we ever loose sight of him, we have lost sight of everything. Everything we do should be about Jesus. Period.
3 - Preach humbly. If we truly understand who we are, wretched sinners, then we will preach accordingly. Paul says he was the chief of sinners, yet his messages are still effective because it was not his message, but God speaking directly to the hearts of man.
4 - Preach repentance and forgiveness. One without the other will not do. We must have both. Some churches focus on one without the other. We must endeavor to preach both and do it constantly.
5 - Preach to refute false teaching. Our world is littered with false teaching. Some churches have chosen to ignore it. Others have indeed promoted it themselves. We need to endeavor to preach to the true gospel and make sure we point out the false ones.
Monday, February 8, 2010
We don't need a REVIVAL!
I've come to the conclusion (call me crazy), but I don't think the church in the US needs a "revival" as so many church-goers are praying for. In case you aren't aware of this, thousands of churches in America pray for revival everyday. I preached a sermon one time saying that if you draw a box in the ground and revival starts in that box then it will spread to others. Most church-goers tend to think revival is the answer to their woes.
With church attendance dropping and public perception of the church at an all-time low, most people think that the answer is revival. I have to disagree. I've been doing a lot of listening lately. I haven't talked much. As a matter of fact, I have only preached one time in the past several years. God has had my ear. I have been investigating several different trends in the western church and have to this astonishing conclusion. Most church-goers do not know the bible. Forget revival, we need a REFORMATION.
You see, if you ask any John Doe christian out there what the message of the gospel is, you will likely get a myriad of responses. And, only a few of those responses will hit anywhere near what the gospel actually is. This is very bad. Forget praying for a revival. We don't even know the word enough to proclaim Christ's death on the cross and the repentance of sins.
Here is what we "know": God loves you, he wants a good life for you, he wants you to be happy, he wants you to have lots of money and good job, he wants you to have your heart's desires.
This is all hogwash (except that God really does love you, but you must repent). God never promises you a good life. He doesn't care if you own a Lexus or not. The only thing that matters is that you accept his death on the cross as punishment for your sins and that you repent of those sins. You can't do this on your own. He has to do this in you. He is the one that is the author of your salvation. You don't choose God, he chooses you.
Revival assumes that people were once alive, but now are dead and in need of being brought back to life. I tell you this. If you don't know the Word, you were never alive to begin with. Maybe you experienced some emotional induced, feel-goodness that made you think that God was with you. Maybe you recited a prayer that meant nothing to you. None of that saves you. God alone is responsible for salvation. You must have faith and faith must be given to you.
One of my favorite sections in Scripture is when Jesus asks his disciples, "Who do you say that I am?" And some of them guess at it, but Peter gets it right. He says, "You are the Christ." Jesus then tells him that he is blessed because flesh and blood did not reveal this to him, but God in heaven. Did you notice that last part. I used to think Peter was smarter than the other disciples, but he wasn't. God revealed it to him. It had nothing do with Peter and his wits.
If you study the Reformation you will learn that biblical literacy was at an all-time low during this era. Very few people owned a bible and even less could read one. This is in stark contrast to the age we live in, in one way. We have bibles all over the place. We have camouflage bibles, girl bibles, boy bibles, marriage bibles and all the like. Yet, just like those people during the age of the Reformation, we do not know the bible.
This is very scary. The bible warns us that during the last days there will come a great falling away and that people will run to and fro looking for teachers to scratch their itching ears. People want to find pastors that will tell them what they want to hear. Does this sound familiar in our age of having to have good self-image and self-esteem and so on? We are ripe for the picking when it comes to the great apostasy that is spoken of in Scripture.
Pray for a Reformation. I am trying to figure out how to do my part. I preached the gospel to a co-worker the other day. He did not repent, but I think it may have been the first time he heard the true gospel given the questions he asked and the comments he made. Pray for him.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Letters to the Editor:
Christianity is down right silly sometimes and a lot of the "Political Correctness" of the world has slipped in the door. Below are fictitious letters to the Editor if Christianity Today were to publish Paul's letter to the church in Galatia.
WHAT IF CHRISTIANITY TODAY PUBLISHED PAUL'S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS?
-----------------------------------------------
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Dear Christianity Today:
In response to Paul D. Apostle’s article about the Galatian church in your January issue, I have to say how appalled I am by the unchristian tone of this hit piece. Why the negativity? Has he been to the Galatian church recently? I happen to know some of the people at that church, and they are the most loving, caring people I’ve ever met.
Phyllis Snodgrass; Ann Arbor, MI
————————————————————————
Dear Editor:
How arrogant of Mr. Apostle to think he has the right to judge these people and label them accursed. Isn’t that God’s job? Regardless of this circumcision issue, these Galatians believe in Jesus just as much as he does, and it is very Pharisaical to condemn them just because they differ on such a secondary issue. Personally, I don’t want a sharp instrument anywhere near my zipper, but that doesn’t give me the right to judge how someone else follows Christ. Can’t we just focus on our common commitment to Christ and furthering His kingdom, instead of tearing down fellow believers over petty doctrinal matters?
Ed Bilgeway; Tonganoxie, KS
————————————————————————–
Dear CT:
I’ve seen other dubious articles by Paul Apostle in the past, and frankly I’m surprised you felt that his recurrent criticisms of the Church deserved to be printed in your magazine. Mr. Apostle for many years now has had a penchant for thinking he has a right to “mark” certain Christian teachers who don’t agree with his biblical position. Certainly I commend him for desiring to stay faithful to God’s word, but I think he errs in being so dogmatic about his views to the point where he feels free to openly attack his brethren. His attitude makes it difficult to fully unify the Church, and gives credence to the opposition’s view that Christians are judgmental, arrogant people who never show God’s love.
Ken Groener; San Diego, CA
—————————————————————————-
To the Editors:
Paul Apostle says that he hopes the Galatian teachers will cut off their own privates? What kind of Christian attitude is that? Shame on him!
Martha Bobbitt; Boulder, CO
—————————————————————————-
Dear Christianity Today:
The fact that Paul Apostle brags about his public run-in with Peter Cephas, a well-respected leader and brother in Christ, exposes Mr. Apostle for the divisive figure that he has become in the Church today. His diatribe against the Galatian church is just more of the same misguided focus on an antiquated reliance on doctrine instead of love and tolerance. Just look how his hypercritical attitude has cast aspersions on homosexual believers and women elders! The real problem within the Church today is not the lack of doctrinal devotion, as Apostle seems to believe, but in our inability to be transformed by our individual journeys in the Spirit. Evidently, Apostle has failed to detach himself from his legalistic background as a Pharisee, and is unable to let go and experience the genuine love for Christ that is coming from the Galatians who strive to worship God in their own special way.
William Zenby; Richmond, VA
——————————————————————————
Kind Editors:
I happen to be a member of First Christian Church of Galatia, and I take issue with Mr. Apostle’s article. How can he criticize a ministry that has been so blessed by God? Our church has baptized many new members and has made huge in-roads in the Jewish community with our pragmatic view on circumcision. Such a “seeker-sensitive” approach has given the Jews the respect they deserve for being God’s chosen people for thousands of years. In addition, every Gentile in our midst has felt honored to engage in the many edifying rituals of the Hebrew heritage, including circumcision, without losing their passion for Jesus. My advice to Mr. Apostle is to stick to spreading the gospel message of Christ’s unconditional love, and quit criticizing what God is clearly blessing in other churches.
Miriam “Betty” Ben-Hur; Galatia, Turkey
——————————————————————————-
EDITOR’S NOTE: Christianity Today apologizes for our rash decision in publishing Paul Apostle’s exposé of the Galatian church. Had we known the extent in which our readership and advertisers would withdraw their financial support, we never would have printed such unpopular biblical truth. We regret any damage we may have caused in propagating the doctrines of Christ.
Reblogged from The Sacred Sandwich.
WHAT IF CHRISTIANITY TODAY PUBLISHED PAUL'S LETTER TO THE GALATIANS?
-----------------------------------------------
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Dear Christianity Today:
In response to Paul D. Apostle’s article about the Galatian church in your January issue, I have to say how appalled I am by the unchristian tone of this hit piece. Why the negativity? Has he been to the Galatian church recently? I happen to know some of the people at that church, and they are the most loving, caring people I’ve ever met.
Phyllis Snodgrass; Ann Arbor, MI
————————————————————————
Dear Editor:
How arrogant of Mr. Apostle to think he has the right to judge these people and label them accursed. Isn’t that God’s job? Regardless of this circumcision issue, these Galatians believe in Jesus just as much as he does, and it is very Pharisaical to condemn them just because they differ on such a secondary issue. Personally, I don’t want a sharp instrument anywhere near my zipper, but that doesn’t give me the right to judge how someone else follows Christ. Can’t we just focus on our common commitment to Christ and furthering His kingdom, instead of tearing down fellow believers over petty doctrinal matters?
Ed Bilgeway; Tonganoxie, KS
————————————————————————–
Dear CT:
I’ve seen other dubious articles by Paul Apostle in the past, and frankly I’m surprised you felt that his recurrent criticisms of the Church deserved to be printed in your magazine. Mr. Apostle for many years now has had a penchant for thinking he has a right to “mark” certain Christian teachers who don’t agree with his biblical position. Certainly I commend him for desiring to stay faithful to God’s word, but I think he errs in being so dogmatic about his views to the point where he feels free to openly attack his brethren. His attitude makes it difficult to fully unify the Church, and gives credence to the opposition’s view that Christians are judgmental, arrogant people who never show God’s love.
Ken Groener; San Diego, CA
—————————————————————————-
To the Editors:
Paul Apostle says that he hopes the Galatian teachers will cut off their own privates? What kind of Christian attitude is that? Shame on him!
Martha Bobbitt; Boulder, CO
—————————————————————————-
Dear Christianity Today:
The fact that Paul Apostle brags about his public run-in with Peter Cephas, a well-respected leader and brother in Christ, exposes Mr. Apostle for the divisive figure that he has become in the Church today. His diatribe against the Galatian church is just more of the same misguided focus on an antiquated reliance on doctrine instead of love and tolerance. Just look how his hypercritical attitude has cast aspersions on homosexual believers and women elders! The real problem within the Church today is not the lack of doctrinal devotion, as Apostle seems to believe, but in our inability to be transformed by our individual journeys in the Spirit. Evidently, Apostle has failed to detach himself from his legalistic background as a Pharisee, and is unable to let go and experience the genuine love for Christ that is coming from the Galatians who strive to worship God in their own special way.
William Zenby; Richmond, VA
——————————————————————————
Kind Editors:
I happen to be a member of First Christian Church of Galatia, and I take issue with Mr. Apostle’s article. How can he criticize a ministry that has been so blessed by God? Our church has baptized many new members and has made huge in-roads in the Jewish community with our pragmatic view on circumcision. Such a “seeker-sensitive” approach has given the Jews the respect they deserve for being God’s chosen people for thousands of years. In addition, every Gentile in our midst has felt honored to engage in the many edifying rituals of the Hebrew heritage, including circumcision, without losing their passion for Jesus. My advice to Mr. Apostle is to stick to spreading the gospel message of Christ’s unconditional love, and quit criticizing what God is clearly blessing in other churches.
Miriam “Betty” Ben-Hur; Galatia, Turkey
——————————————————————————-
EDITOR’S NOTE: Christianity Today apologizes for our rash decision in publishing Paul Apostle’s exposé of the Galatian church. Had we known the extent in which our readership and advertisers would withdraw their financial support, we never would have printed such unpopular biblical truth. We regret any damage we may have caused in propagating the doctrines of Christ.
Reblogged from The Sacred Sandwich.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Would the real God please stand up?
I think one of the issues that most people have when learning about God is the fact that if you read the Old Testament you will start to see God as a mean, unloving figure who would rain down fire from heaven and crush armies with walls of water and then when you read the New Testament it's almost like God got saved and now he is living a better life of love and hope.
Many people view the bible this way and it is easy to understand why if you look at the scriptures without properly understanding the gospel message. To me what is really scary about the bible is not the fact that in our natural condition that if we do something wrong, we don't live up to God's standards, it's the fact that even our good works do not live up to God's standard. The bible describes our righteousness or our good works as nothing more than filthy rags to God.
We have a hard time understanding that not only does God condemn our bad works, but our good works serve to condemn us as well. But first, we need to define what our righteousness is according to the Bible:
"And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us." Deut. 6:25.
So by keeping the commandments that is our righteousness. Now I for one have broken several of the commandments, but that's just me. I know of some really good people who have kept them all. The bible tells us of one such man:
"And a certain young ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said to him, Why do you call me good? None is good, except one, that is God. You know the commandments, do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, honor you father and mother.
And he said, All these I have kept from my youth." Luke 18:18-21 (emphasis added mine)
Notice that the rich young ruler had kept all the commandments. What an amazing feat! This is not unlike the Pharisee's in Bible. The Pharisees were a group of people that were notoriously zealous over God's law and kept every commandment and then added some more on top of it. Listen to this Pharisee pray:
"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank you, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice a week and I give tithes of all that I possess." Luke 18:11-12
Notice that the Pharisee said that he fasted twice a week and gave tithes of all that he possessed. That was above and beyond the call of duty. The Law only required you to fast once a week and you did not have to tithe a tenth of everything you possessed only what you made. This was truly a model citizen.
The problem comes in when we are told later on in the story about the Pharisee that the publican, who beat himself on the chest begging for God's mercy, went home justified. If the story stopped there I can still handle it, but then it says that the Pharisee was not justified. So even though he was doing everything right according to the law, he was still not justified before God. How can this be?
How can God punish someone who does so much good? This question is one of many people's main objections to Christianity. How can a loving God send "good" people to hell. The problem is that our standard of good is different than his. The bible teaches that none are good. No one lives up to his standard. That is just as true in the New Testament as the Old Testament. God hasn't changed.
One other thing that must be considered when viewing God is the fact that He is not trapped in time, like we are. He is not subjected to thinking of time in the same manner as us. So when we view God we are viewing him through our reference point, which in this case is 2010. God did not change from the Old Testament to the New Testament...more of his plan was revealed.
In the next few posts, I plan to tackle a thought that is similar to this in nature...what C.S. Lewis called "chronological snobbery". Stay tuned same bat channel, same bat station.
Many people view the bible this way and it is easy to understand why if you look at the scriptures without properly understanding the gospel message. To me what is really scary about the bible is not the fact that in our natural condition that if we do something wrong, we don't live up to God's standards, it's the fact that even our good works do not live up to God's standard. The bible describes our righteousness or our good works as nothing more than filthy rags to God.
We have a hard time understanding that not only does God condemn our bad works, but our good works serve to condemn us as well. But first, we need to define what our righteousness is according to the Bible:
"And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us." Deut. 6:25.
So by keeping the commandments that is our righteousness. Now I for one have broken several of the commandments, but that's just me. I know of some really good people who have kept them all. The bible tells us of one such man:
"And a certain young ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said to him, Why do you call me good? None is good, except one, that is God. You know the commandments, do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, honor you father and mother.
And he said, All these I have kept from my youth." Luke 18:18-21 (emphasis added mine)
Notice that the rich young ruler had kept all the commandments. What an amazing feat! This is not unlike the Pharisee's in Bible. The Pharisees were a group of people that were notoriously zealous over God's law and kept every commandment and then added some more on top of it. Listen to this Pharisee pray:
"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank you, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice a week and I give tithes of all that I possess." Luke 18:11-12
Notice that the Pharisee said that he fasted twice a week and gave tithes of all that he possessed. That was above and beyond the call of duty. The Law only required you to fast once a week and you did not have to tithe a tenth of everything you possessed only what you made. This was truly a model citizen.
The problem comes in when we are told later on in the story about the Pharisee that the publican, who beat himself on the chest begging for God's mercy, went home justified. If the story stopped there I can still handle it, but then it says that the Pharisee was not justified. So even though he was doing everything right according to the law, he was still not justified before God. How can this be?
How can God punish someone who does so much good? This question is one of many people's main objections to Christianity. How can a loving God send "good" people to hell. The problem is that our standard of good is different than his. The bible teaches that none are good. No one lives up to his standard. That is just as true in the New Testament as the Old Testament. God hasn't changed.
One other thing that must be considered when viewing God is the fact that He is not trapped in time, like we are. He is not subjected to thinking of time in the same manner as us. So when we view God we are viewing him through our reference point, which in this case is 2010. God did not change from the Old Testament to the New Testament...more of his plan was revealed.
In the next few posts, I plan to tackle a thought that is similar to this in nature...what C.S. Lewis called "chronological snobbery". Stay tuned same bat channel, same bat station.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Real Worship Music...
Lately I have been having conflicting thoughts about worship. Part of me really enjoys the worship at most churches, but some of the songs make me kind of uneasy. First off, I am a guy and as a guy, it is very difficult for me to worship when the words and music are geared toward a female audience.
The church is and has been suffering from a lack of male leadership and I don't mean that in the whole we don't have enough males in leadership. I mean that the males that we have are mostly feminine. This is not just my church, but the church as a whole. This also doesn't mean that I think the church should be entirely masculine. What this does mean is that I don't really think its proper for me to sing a song about romancing with Jesus. It's just not right. (I know my friend Daniel, who is a worship leader, will likely read this and I apologize if I offend you in advance. This is not directed at you).
Here is a sampling of what I mean:
"Look at the way the flowers bloom, they want to show you their beauty, Lord.
Running waters dance, you and I romance. Unto you be all the glory."
Two problems...It's girly and it could be sung to Allah or Buddha or your girlfriend (if you take out the word Lord). This is not the only song. Try another:
Draw me close to You
Never let me go
I lay it all down again
To hear You say that I'm Your friend
You are my desire
No one else will do
'Cause nothing else could take Your place
To feel the warmth of Your embrace
Help me find the way
Bring me back to You
You're all I want
You're all I've ever needed
You're all I want
Help me know You are near
This is really a song that you could sing to your girlfriend of spouse or whomever. I can even picture this one sung by Barry White. This is an older song but you get the picture, the problem has been around for a while. And, just because you capitalize the word You, doesn't mean you're song is sung to Jesus.
Here's a quote from Mark Driscoll:
"I’ll be happy when we have more than just prom songs to Jesus sung by some effeminate guy on an acoustic guitar offered as mainstream worship music. Right now most worship music is still coming from the top down through such things as Christian radio and record labels. But the trend today in a lot of churches is writing your own music to reflect your culture and community, and I pray this trend of music from the bottom up continues."
Now let me say this: I love Jesus. He has saved me. He is working in my life. I worship him. BUT, he is not my lover, I do not want sweet kisses in my ear, no need for romance here. I just can't go that far. I think this kind of talk makes visitor's uneasy and probably confuses them as well. It also makes any guy in the audience want to get up and run out.
The other problem I have with contemporary worship music is so much of it is me-centered and not Christ centered. We used to sing a song years ago:
I went to the enemies camp and I took back what he stole from ME (repeat).
He's under MY feet (repeat).
Satan is under MY feet.
That was essentially the whole song. It was all about me. It was all about me doing something. This song is wrong on so many levels, but it is not unlike some other songs we sing: Here I am to worship, I am free and Lord I give you my heart (all of which are on the Top 100 praise songs being sung in churches right now according to CCLI). The last song I listed presents several doctrinal problems. One of which is the fact that, despite what you have heard in 90% of churches, you can't give your heart to God. That is decision-theology and it is incorrect. The apostle Paul in his letter to the CHURCH in Rome says that "No one seeks after God" (Romans 3:11). That means that you wouldn't choose to give Jesus your heart even if you could. Our natural state is to be an enemy of God. It is only through grace by faith in Jesus Christ that we are saved. This song like many exalts us over God. We have the power, we choose to give to God, when in fact we can't do anything of the sort. Truth be told, just like Adam we choose to run from God and cover ourselves with fig leaves.
The opposing opinion is that we need to bring the hymnals back into the church, which I also have a problem with. I do not mind songs in the hymnal, but I do not think we need to be singing to music that was popular in 1836. Also, I can barely understand some of the words used by songwriters back then. (On a funny note, I still can't tell you what Gloria En Excelsis Deo means without looking it up, but we used to sing it every year at my mom's church. I asked her and she didn't know what it meant either. It's funny how we can just sing things at church and never know what we are singing or what it means...or should I say it's sad?)
God is a God of today. He commands us to sing a new song to him. We just need musicians and song writers to 'man-up' and start writing some good music that is Christ-centered. There is no reason why this can't be done. I'm not a good song-writer (I've tried and all I came up with was the popular blues song..."I keep drinking Mountain Dew, trying to wash my blues away." You may have heard of it. I don't know). Even though I can't write songs, I can tell you this: repeating the same line over and over is just poor writing skills, not real worship.
I recently heard an interview with Matt Redman on this subject and he said that he regretted the fact that he used some many words in his songs that were geared more toward romance than toward being in awe of God. (Click Here to see the interview).
Bottom line...worship should be about Jesus. When we take Jesus out of the equation we are left with nothing more than songs. Songs on their own are not worship. Music alone is not worship. Both of these things can enhance worship, but if we are singing about ourselves or about some mystical lover, we are not worshiping Jesus.
(Pictured at top is Andrew Schwab of Project 86)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)