Should I Leave My Church?

It happens time and again. George attends a church a few times, and excitedly moves into membership. Then, over the course of a year or two, his excitement wanes. The grass looks greener elsewhere. So George finds a second church, and excitedly joins it. Two years later the process repeats itself. Hop, hop, hop. One church after another.

The American consumer mentality has affected the way many of us choose to join and leave churches. Yet committing to a particular local assembly in the Body of Christ should not be a consumer decision. For Christians are not consumers in a church market; we are the hands and feet and eyes and ears of the Body.

Several years ago, we put together an outline of biblical guidelines concerning how to choose a church. Today, we address the other end of the decision-making process: When should I leave a church? And if I leave, how should I leave?

Consider first of all some common bad reasons for leaving a church:

a) “Someone hurt me!” Scripture commands us to “bear with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgive each other” (Colossians 3:13). So in our church covenant, we commit ourselves to be “slow to take offense, and always [to] be ready for reconciliation.” God uses the sins of others to mold us into His likeness as we learn to forbear and forgive. As in marriage, this growth only takes place in an atmosphere of covenant faithfulness to one another. We have to be committed to each other in order to work through difficult issues. So don’t leave a church because you are hurt.

b) “I think I would be happier elsewhere” or “I’d like to be a part of this program that this church doesn’t have.” This is the essence of the American consumer mentality. Instead of this “me first” attitude, we are to have a “Kingdom first” attitude through commitment to a local body. When (not if!) we see its flaws, we are to work to strengthen those aspects of the body. Indeed, frequently we most notice those areas of weakness in which we ourselves are gifted to serve. So if you see something that is not getting done – do it! Then organize and motivate others to do it with you.

c) “My friends have now left.” Again, this reflects a consumer mentality. Our commitment is to the body, not to a few individuals.

d) “I should be an elder or teacher and I’m not.” Sometimes this is more pointed: “I should be serving in that role rather than so-and-so.” Being an elder or a teacher is a privilege, not a right. A person becomes an elder or teacher by finding ways to serve and then serving faithfully, often one-on-one and behind the scenes, all the while supporting the present church elders and unifying the church behind their leadership. Someone who will only be happy with the public recognition of the office is, in fact, unqualified to serve in the office. If someone “aspires to the oversight” (1 Timothy 3:1, literal translation), he should step out and do it without the title, all the while working toward Christian maturity as detailed in the biblical lists of qualifications for elder. When he faithfully serves in this way, it will then be easy for the church to formally recognize this man as an elder when the leadership team needs his specific set of skills and gifts.

e) “I’m disappointed in my pastors and elders.” There are several forms that this disappointment takes: “I don’t get the personal attention from the leadership I once got;” “The preaching is not speaking to me as it once was;” “The pastor’s personality is different than what I thought;” “The elders are not leading the church the direction I think it should go.” A sermon from several years ago, ‘Why are My Pastors and Elders So Disappointing, and What Should I Do About It?” goes in to much more detail on this point. In sum, we should speak about such issues with an elder, being honest and open about our thoughts, and listening carefully to his response. But we must maintain an attitude of humility, and – with the qualifications discussed below – should have an inclination to follow the leaders, saying, “I trust God to direct you, and trust His leadership through yours. Whether I agree or not, is there anything I can do to support you?”

Those are all bad reasons to leave a church. They have in common a focus on me, my needs, my gifts.

Consider, second, some biblical reasons to consider leaving a church. Note how these do not have “me” at the center:

a) “My life circumstances have changed, making continued participation difficult.” For example, a young couple without children may be willing to drive 45 minutes regularly to participate in church activities. Once they have a baby, this may no longer be an option, and they have to decide between considerably less involvement or finding a closer church home.

b) “There is a significant opportunity to advance the Kingdom and grow as an ambassador of the Kingdom in another church.” Here we must carefully distinguish between a consumer mindset and a Kingdom mindset; we’ll need help and prayer from others, including from the leaders in our present church, in making the distinction.

c) “The leadership of my present church has made biblically questionable decisions.” These could include questionable teaching, a questionable direction of the church, or a questionable response to sin in the church. Again, the guidelines in the “disappointing elders” sermon are helpful here. We need to give the leadership the opportunity to address our concerns, and we must acknowledge that there are some areas in Scripture that are disputable among Bible-believing Christians.

If any of these possible reasons to leave are a concern, we should seek the counsel and prayer of the leaders early on. Never approach a pastor or elder with a concern you are stating for the first time, and then say, “That’s why we’ve decided to leave.” God gives the gift of elders to provide oversight and prayer in tough situations. Take advantage of that. The final decision to leave or not to leave is always yours, but take the counsel and advice of your elders seriously.

Consider, third, some serious issues that, if accurately assessed and not corrected, require you to leave a church:

a) When important and clear biblical doctrine is distorted or avoided (as, for example, in the churches in Galatia). In this case, if you can, try to stay and correct the wrong teaching. This is not always possible, however.

b) When there is a lack of financial accountability. Even the Apostle Paul was careful not to give even a hint of financial impropriety in the way he handled an offering (2 Corinthians 8:18-21).

c) When there is clear, publically known, unconfessed sin in the church, which is not dealt with (as in 1 Corinthians 5).

Even in these serious cases, we should approach an elder early on and use the guidelines from the “disappointing elders” sermon. It could be that we misunderstand the situation; it could be that a faithful elder has been working behind the scenes to correct the situation, and needs your support and the support of others to move forward biblically. You may be part of the solution.

If you decide after counsel and prayer that it is time to leave, how should you leave?

If at all possible, depend on your current leaders through the process: Ask them for recommendations concerning other churches; tell them where you are visiting and seek their prayers and counsel; unless they have proven themselves to be heretics, stay under their authority until you formally move into membership in a new church. Finally, consider with the leadership how best to say goodbye to your present congregation.

For the local church is not a club. It is not a preaching point. It is, instead, the Body of Christ actualized, lived out in microcosm – a gathering of the redeemed and justified, but a gathering of those still stained by sin. We thus will hurt each other; we will disappoint one another. But God commands us to “love one another deeply, from the heart” (1 Peter 1:22). This includes speaking hard truths to one another when necessary, gracefully and humbly. This also includes being committed to one another, and continuing to serve God together faithfully, especially when that is difficult.

We elders would be delighted if every present member of DGCC remained in this local body for the next 20 years, for you all give us great joy. But we know that’s not God’s plan – and thus we know that that is not best for us, not best for all of you, not best for His glory. There will come a time for many of us to move on. But we pray that when the time comes, each of us would go with the blessings of the leadership, and we would then continue in prayer for one another, thankful for the way God used us to spur one another on to love and good works, and eagerly anticipating our reunion before the Throne, singing, “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” (Revelation 5:12).

God Glorified in Man’s Dependence

[This is a summary of Jonathan Edwards’ sermon in Boston July 8, 1731 – his first published work. See the entire sermon – almost five times as long – here. I encourage you to meditate on your dependence on God as the year concludes, and to resolve to live more and more fully in light of that dependence in 2013 – Coty]

God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,  so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.  And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 1:28-31)

Paul wrote this letter to Greeks, who held human wisdom in high regard. God destroys human wisdom through the Gospel. Even the greatest human wisdom cannot lead to a full knowledge of God; but it pleases God to reveal Himself graciously, so that “no human being might boast.” By this we see:

1)      God’s aim in His plan of redemption: that man should glory not in himself, but in God alone.

2)      How that end is attained: By man’s absolute dependence on God in the work of redemption.

Doctrine

I) There is an absolute and universal dependence of the redeemed on God

The redeemed have all of their good of God, through God, and in God: Of Him, in that He is the cause and origin of all good things; through Him, in that He is the means by which we obtain every good thing; and in Him, in that He Himself is the greatest good. Therefore, the redeemed are entirely dependent upon God for their all.

Consider these in turn:

1)      The redeemed have all good OF God.

  1. God gives us our Redeemer, as Christ is His only Son.
  2. God gives us faith so that we might be in Christ (Ephesians 2:8).
  3. The benefits that come to us in Christ are from God: He is the one who pardons and justifies and cleanses and transforms and sanctifies.
  4. God Himself is the source of the means of grace He uses in our sanctification.
  5. God gives us His Word.
  6. God gives us His ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
  7. God gives us His human ministers, and their success depends entirely and absolutely on Him.

All these are given purely by grace – indeed, by infinitely great grace. For we were completely unworthy of His gift, instead meriting His wrath. And God gave this gift most freely. He could have rejected fallen man, as He did the fallen angels. There was nothing in us to attract Him, and nothing in the saved to distinguish them from the unsaved. We are completely dependent upon Him for holiness, for His favor, for happiness – we would have none of these apart from His free grace.

Furthermore, all of these come from the power of God (Ephesians 1:19). We are dependent on God’s power through every step of our redemption: To convert us, to give us faith in Jesus, and to give us a new nature. For God must create us anew (2 Corinthians 5:17); indeed, He must raise us from the dead (Colossians 2:12-13). Yet this is a more glorious work of power than the first creation or even raising a man from the dead, because the new spiritual life is more glorious – especially in contrast with the depth of corruption to which we fell. God magnifies His power then further in preserving us in His grace (1 Peter 1:5). The redeemed are dependent on God’s power for every exercise of grace, for continually redirecting our hearts, for subduing sin, for producing good works, for becoming Christlike – and ultimately for our new bodies in the new heavens and new earth.

2)       The redeemed have all good THROUGH God.

All the benefits the redeemed receive come through the Mediator, Jesus, who is God Himself. God is both the purchaser and the price of our redemption, for Christ purchased these blessing for us by offering up Himself.

3)      The redeemed have all good IN God. And this holds both for the good that gives them joy, and for the pleasure itself in their souls.

  1. a.      The good that gives the redeemed their highest joy is God Himself. God is the inheritance of the saints, their wealth, treasure, food, life, dwelling-place, crown, honor, and glory. They have none in heaven but God. The beauty of God will forever give joy to the saints, and His love will be their everlasting feast. While the redeemed will enjoy the angels, one another, and the redeemed creation, whatever yields delight in these will be what is seen of God in them.
  2. b.      The joy itself of the redeemed comes from a kind of participation in God. God puts His own beauty upon their souls. They are made partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4), partakers of His holiness (Hebrews 12:10). This occurs through the Holy Spirit dwelling in the redeemed. He, acting in, upon, and with the soul, becomes a fountain of true holiness and joy (John 4:14, 7:38-39). By partaking of the Holy Spirit, the redeemed have communion with Christ in His fullness. Indeed, the Spirit of God is the great promise of the Father (Luke 24:49).

All the benefits the redeemed receive come through the Mediator, Jesus, who is God Himself. God is both the purchaser and the price of our redemption, for Christ purchased these blessing for us by offering up Himself.

II) God is glorified in the work of redemption through this great, universal dependence on Him

1)      Through this dependence, man has greater occasion and obligation to acknowledge God’s character. It is easy for us to neglect and ignore those things on which we do not depend, but we of necessity think of and concern ourselves with those things on which we depend.

2)      This dependence demonstrates the greatness of God’s glory compared to the creature’s. The greater that men exalt themselves, so much the less they exalt God. But God’s work of redemption shows that the creature is nothing, and God is all. He is seen to be infinitely above us in strength, wisdom, and holiness. It is this acknowledgment of the difference between us and God that yields God the glory He deserves.

3)      God therefore has our whole souls, and should be the object of our undivided respect. If we had our dependence partly on God and partly on something else, we would divide our respect among God and the other. But now this cannot happen once we understand the nature of redemption: Whatever attracts our respect is seen to be the gift of God, and so our respect unites in Him as the center.

Application

1)      Marvel at God’s wisdom in the work of redemption! God has made man’s ruined state through the Fall an occasion for the advancement of His glory. He does this through our being even more dependent on Him today than Adam and Eve were before the Fall. God lifts us up and exalts us in such a way that we deserve no glory, but He deserves it all. Furthermore, God accomplishes this in such a way that each person of the Trinity is equally glorified in the work, as the redeemed are absolutely dependent on every Person for all.

2)      Any teaching that takes away our absolute dependence upon God attempts to diminish the glory God deserves, and thus to thwart the design of our redemption.

3)      This explains why salvation is by faith. For faith is an acknowledgment of absolute dependence on God for salvation. This is how God glorifies Himself in redemption. Faith declares that man can do nothing, and God does everything, so that He receives all the glory for redemption. To be saved, man must humble himself as a child; he must acknowledge that he is “wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked” (Revelation 3:17). It is the delight of the believing soul to humble itself and to exalt God alone (Psalm 115:1).

4)      Therefore, let us exalt God alone, and ascribe to him all the glory of redemption. Let us have a greater and greater understanding of our great dependence upon God; let us put to death a self-dependent and self-righteous disposition. Man is prone to exalt himself, and to depend on his own power or goodness, thinking happiness will come through his efforts. He is prone to think that happiness will come from objects God withholds or denies. But this doctrine should teach us to exalt God alone – by trust, by reliance, and by praise. So let him who boasts, boast in the Lord.

  1. Do any of you think that you are saved, that your sins are forgiven, that you have God’s favor, that you are God’s child – indeed, that you are an heir of eternal life? Then give God all the glory! He alone makes you different from the worst of men.
  2. Do any of you have much comfort and strong hope of eternal life? Do not let this hope exalt you, but rather reflect on your own unworthiness of such a favor, and so exalt God alone.
  3. Are any of you abundant in good works and holiness? Take no glory of that abundance to yourself, but ascribe it to him who “created [us] in Christ Jesus for good works” (Ephesians 2:10).

Christmas, God as Author, and the Problem of Evil

[Here are the last several paragraphs of Joe Rigney’s article “Confronting the Problem(s) of Evil: Biblical, Philosophical, and Emotional Reflections on a Perpetual Question,” posted December 21 at Desiring God. You will benefit greatly from reading it in its entirety. Joe is Assistant Professor of Theology and Christian Worldview at Bethlehem College and Seminary – Coty]

This is what the Incarnation is all about: the Author of the story becoming not just a character, but a human character. In this narrative, God is the storyteller and the main character. He is the Bard and the hero. He authors the fairy tale and then comes to kill the dragon and get the girl.

The Incarnation is God’s definitive answer to the emotional problem of evil. The living God is not a detached observer or absentee landlord. He doesn’t stand aloof from the suffering and pain and evil that forms the central tension of his epic. The God who is born is also the God who bleeds, the God who dies, the God who identifies with our sorrows by becoming the Man of Sorrows, acquainted with grief.

God comes down, in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and draws to himself all of the sin and the shame, the rebellion and the hate, the sickness and the death, and swallows it whole. And he swallows it by letting it swallow him. The Dragon is crushed in the crushing of the Prince of Peace. The triumphant hour of darkness and evil occurs on the day we know as Good Friday.

This biblical paradigm frees Rachel to lament when Herod slays her little children, to weep that her little ones are no more, knowing that God is weeping with her, shedding Christmas tears of sovereign mercy. And it does so without removing the soul-anchoring consolation that the Author of this story has good and wise purposes in writing his story in the way that he does. We desperately need both aspects of the analogy. We need a Sovereign Author who crafts each chapter, paragraph, and sentence (no matter how horrible) into a fitting narrative, one in which evil exists to be crushed underfoot. And we need a Consoling Character, a very present help who identifies and suffers with the brokenhearted, entering into our pain and loss with love that will endure long after the last tear falls.

Because in the story God is telling, evil does not have the last word. Good Friday is not the end (which is why it’s so good). He burst from the spiced tomb on Resurrection Sunday, commissioned his disciples, and ascended to his throne, where now he sits until all of his enemies are subdued under his feet, including and especially Evil.

This then is the truth, goodness, and beauty of the Christian answer to the problem(s) of evil. It is the confession of Jesus Christ, the Divine Author who never himself does evil, but instead conquers all evil by enduring the greatest evil, and thereby delivers all those enslaved and oppressed by evil who put their hope in him.

O Come, O Come Immanuel.

The Folly of Scientism

University of South Carolina Biology Professor Austin Hughes, writing in the fall edition of The New Atlantis:

Both in the work of professional philosophers and in popular writings by natural scientists, it is frequently claimed that natural science does or soon will constitute the entire domain of truth. And this attitude is becoming more widespread among scientists themselves. All too many of my contemporaries in science have accepted without question the hype that suggests that an advanced degree in some area of natural science confers the ability to pontificate wisely on any and all subjects. . . . Is it really true that natural science provides a satisfying and reasonably complete account of everything we see, experience, and seek to understand – of every phenomenon in the universe? And is it true that science is more capable, even singularly capable, of answering the questions that once were addressed by philosophy?

Read the whole article. (HT: Justin Taylor)

Post-Caroling Party of the Nations

Check out this video of our party Sunday evening in the home of our Burmese friends, after caroling (in the drizzle) through the Sailboat Bay Apartments. Featuring songs in Ciin (from Burma), Swahili, and Tamil.

(Note: You have to be logged in to Facebook to view the video).

Moe Bergeron, DGCC, Faithfulness, and the Kingdom

Don’t miss this excellent video from Desiring God about the beginning of the DG internet ministry. The video features my friend Moe Bergeron, a bi-vocational pastor in New England. It is not far-fetched to say that were it not for Moe, there would be no Desiring God Community Church in Charlotte.

Moe began posting Pipers Notes on the fledgling internet in 1995. Very shortly thereafter I found the site via some early search engine. I had never read anything by John Piper before. My brother-in-law Ed, however, had been extolling Piper so I recognized the name. I found his sermons exceptionally helpful, and returned regularly to see if Piper had preached on passages I was about to tackle.

At the time, Moe organized the sermons only by date. There was no index by Scripture passage, limiting its usefulness to me. So I contacted Moe and asked him if someone was working on such an index. He said a few folks had approached him indicating they might produce one, but no one had actually done it. I completed it over the next couple of weeks. Moe was surprised and delighted. He and I continued a correspondence, and we met a few times in the late 90s at conferences in New England. We immediately clicked, finding a real kinship in the God-centered Gospel.

Then, in 2000, after becoming certain that our Lord was calling me into full-time ministry, I wrote Bethlehem Baptist, asking if I might spend 3 months at the church in preparation. No one at Bethlehem knew me; nevertheless, they said yes. I later learned that it was my work on the Pipers Notes Scripture index that proved I was not just some random person trying to get close to an increasingly well-known preacher, but already was part of this God-centered movement.

So I thank God for Moe Bergeron, his vision for free resources on the internet, his boldness in approaching Piper, and his faithfulness to his calling. And I stand amazed at our sovereign God who weaves our lives together into the tapestry of His Kingdom for the glory of His Name.

Video positioning image

The Bible Unity Reading Plan

Should you read the Bible?

Jesus says, “Blessed . . . are those who hear the Word of God and keep it!” (Luke 11:28)

How will reading the Bible bless you?

Paul writes, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

How then should you read God’s Word?

Those same verses from Paul imply that we should read all of it, since every part of it is profitable.

Surely also you should read it daily; in addition you should read it submissively. In Proverbs 8, personified Wisdom cries out:

“Hear instruction and be wise, and do not neglect it. Blessed is the one who listens to me, watching daily at my gates, waiting beside my doors. For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from the LORD, but he who fails to find me injures himself; all who hate me love death“ (Proverbs 8:33-36, emphasis added).  

But what does this look like on a day to day and year to year basis?

If we are to read the Bible daily, with a goal of reading it in its entirety, we will need a plan. I first followed an annual, comprehensive Bible reading plan in 1984. This plan was purely chronological; I began reading with Genesis 1 on January 1 and finished with Revelation 22 on December 31, but in between the plan guided me through Scripture in the order in which events and prophecies occurred. This was eye-opening to me. Though I had grown up in church and in fact had read all of Scripture previously, I had never before seen the overall flow of God’s plan of redemption. In particular, the writings of prophets like Ezekiel and Jeremiah became much more meaningful to me as I read them in conjunction with the historical books. In addition, many psalms came to life as I read them in the context of surrounding events.

I followed chronological plans several more times in subsequent years. However, there are significant weaknesses in following such a plan repeatedly for your daily devotional reading. First of all, you read nothing from the New Testament for more than nine months of the year. Second, a strictly chronological plan jumps around in the four Gospels. The reader therefore misses what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John communicate through the way they each order and select from the events of Jesus’ life. Finally, following chronological plans requires a lot of page flipping.

So twelve years ago I developed the Bible Unity Reading Plan, which yields the benefits of a chronological approach while avoiding these weaknesses.  The Bible Unity Plan has two tracks for each day. The longer track – the left hand column in each day’s reading – is chronological. The second track, in the right column, is a shorter reading from another part of Scripture. This second track includes Matthew, Mark, and John – read straight through – and several epistles while the chronological track makes its way through the Old Testament; it then focuses on Psalms and Proverbs while the chronological track takes you through the remaining books of the New Testament. And with only two passages to read most days, there is minimal page-flipping. The Plan also follows a helpful feature of the Discipleship Journal Bible Reading Plan, scheduling only 25 days of reading per month. This allows you to read something else on Sundays (which I like to do), or to catch up easily if you miss an occasional day.

I have used this plan (or a variant of it) every year from 2001 to the present. I enjoy beginning each New Year with Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1-3:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

I also enjoy the 14th reading in November, which pairs the message of Acts 15 – those from other nations need not become Jewish to be saved – with the foundation of that message in Psalm 67: “Let the peoples praise you, O God; let all the peoples praise you! Let the nations be glad and sing for joy!”

In 2001 – the first time I read through the Bible following the plan – I was astounded by God’s providence. Living in West Africa, on September 11 we did not hear about the destruction of the Twin Towers until late afternoon. That evening I turned to the 11th reading for September – and read three times of the heart-rending but long-prophesied destruction of Jerusalem from 2 Kings 25, Jeremiah 39, and Jeremiah 52.

Finally, every year I look forward to the final day’s readings, which sum up the entire storyline of the Bible:

“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” . . . The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price. . . . He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! (Revelation 22:12-13, 17, 20)   

Praise the LORD from the earth, you great sea creatures and all deeps, fire and hail, snow and mist, stormy wind fulfilling his word! Mountains and all hills, fruit trees and all cedars! Beasts and all livestock, creeping things and flying birds! Kings of the earth and all peoples, princes and all rulers of the earth! Young men and maidens together, old men and children! Let them praise the name of the LORD, for his name alone is exalted; his majesty is above earth and heaven (Psalm 148:7-13).  

I expect to follow this plan, and to finish each year reading those words, as long as I live. I encourage you to join me.

Lessons from John Stott, 1921-2011

John Stott died Wednesday at the age of 90. He was a faithful expositor of the Word of God, a preacher and witness to the Gospel, and a teacher and advocate for pastors from poor countries around the world.

I met him in the early nineties when the Intervarsity Christian Fellowship at Williams College brought him to campus. In a Q and A with the few Christian faculty on campus, I asked him about his record of faithfulness over decades, and how we too might achieve that. I had not used the word “sin” in my question. His answer was direct; with eyes flashing, he said something like this: “The real question is: How do I overcome sin in my life? If we coddle ourselves and allow ourselves to fall into laziness and indiscipline, we will not be faithful. I face the same temptations and have the same sin nature that you have. Faithfulness results from confronting, battling, and, by God’s grace, overcoming those temptations on a daily, indeed hourly, basis.”

So that’s my first lesson to take away from John Stott: Be strong in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. Fight sin. You are a child of light – live like it!

Second:

Stott was an expository preacher when many were teaching that such preaching was passé. My pastor in California, Ray Stedman, worked together with Stott in the seventies and eighties to advance expository preaching in the UK, the US, and around the world. At Stedman’s recommendation, one of the first books I read on preaching was Stott’s Between Two Worlds. This paragraph superbly encapsulates the biblical rationale for preaching:

How dare we speak, if God has not spoken? By ourselves we have nothing to say. To address a congregation without any assurance that we are bearers of a divine message would be the height of arrogance and folly. It is when we are convinced that God is light (and so wanting to be known), that God has acted (and thus made himself known), and that God has spoken (and thus explained his actions), that we must speak and cannot remain silent. As Amos expressed it, ‘The lion has roared; who will not fear? The Lord God has spoken; who can but prophesy?’ (3:8) . . . God has spoken. If we are not sure of this, it would be better to keep our mouth shut. Once we are persuaded that God has spoken, however, then we too must speak. A compulsion rests upon us. Nothing and nobody will be able to silence us. (1982 edition, p. 177).

So that is the second lesson from his life: Preach the Word! Don’t preach your opinions. Don’t preach cute stories about your children. You have nothing of eternal value to say except what He has said. God has spoken – and if you are called to be His herald, you must speak.

Third: At DGCC, we emphasize that preaching is not separate from worship but a necessary and integral component of worship. That emphasis comes to us from the Bible, via John Stott. He wrote in Between Two Worlds:

Word and worship belong indissolubly to each other. All worship is an intelligent and loving response to the revelation of God, because it is the adoration of his Name. Therefore acceptable worship is impossible without preaching. For preaching is making known the Name of the Lord, and worship is praising the name of the Lord made known. Far from being an alien intrusion into worship, the reading and preaching of the Word are actually indispensable to it. The two cannot be divorced. Indeed, it is their unnatural divorce which accounts for the low level of so much contemporary worship. Our worship is poor because our knowledge of God is poor, and our knowledge of God is poor because our preaching is poor. But when the Word of God is expounded in its fulness, and the congregation begin to glimpse the glory of the living God, they bow down in solemn awe and joyful wonder before his throne. It is preaching which accomplishes this, the proclamation of the Word of God in the power of the Spirit of God. That is why preaching is unique and irreplaceable. (1982 edition, p. 95-96).

So the third lesson: Fight tooth and nail against the prevalent attitude, “We have a time of worship, and then we have the sermon.” Pay attention to the public reading of Scripture. Pay attention to the lyrics of the songs, for they too constitute “making known the Name of the Lord.” Make the service a unity in which reading, singing, praying, and preaching all come together to edify and stir the people of God to express joy in the person of God.

Finally, like Francis Schaeffer, John Stott was an accomplished but humble man. This came out in part through his devoting the bulk of the last twenty years of his life to serving pastors in poor countries around the world. As the Sri Lankan Ajith Fernando writes:

Here was humility personified …. We are grateful that he gave so much time coming to the poorer nations not with some huge program which would impress the whole world, but simply to teach us the Bible.

That is my fourth lesson: Serve graciously, lovingly, humbly, not designing some grand program that bears my imprint, but opening up the Word here and around the world to those who hunger for such teaching, and who will in turn teach it faithfully to their friends, their families, their congregations, and the unreached around them. Teach the Word with all authority – knowing that there are children of God listening who far surpass me in godliness and Christlikeness.

So I thank God for the life of this servant of the church. May we imitate him as he imitated Christ. And may our Lord be pleased to raise up – from Charlotte, from Victoria, from Andhra Pradesh, from Mayasilla, from east Asia – the next generation of John Stotts, who will fight sin diligently, who will preach the Word faithfully, who will worship God biblically, and who will serve the Lord humbly.

Review of For the Fame of God’s Name: Essays in Honor of John Piper

A Review of
For the Fame of God’s Name: Essays in Honor of John Piper,
 edited by Sam Storms and Justin Taylor (Crossway, 2010).

Reviewed by Coty Pinckney, Desiring God Community Church, Charlotte NC

“God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.” This central truth of Christian Hedonism summarizes John Piper’s life and ministry. When we want to see how this truth is worked out in missions and preaching and marriage we turn to Let the Nations Be Glad! and The Supremacy of God in Preaching and This Momentary Marriage – or to Piper’s thirty years of sermons, all available online.

But John Piper is not alone in highlighting the biblical centrality of spreading a passion for the supremacy of God in all things for the joy of all peoples. In For the Fame of God’s Name: Essays in Honor of John Piper – a book presented to Piper at the 2010 Desiring God National Conference – Justin Taylor and Sam Storms bring together more than two dozen scholars and pastors to write about Piper’s ministry and to extend his thought. The result is a helpful and challenging volume which displays both the great influence Piper has had, and the biblical moorings of Christian Hedonism.

The book has seven sections (after an initial note of apology to Piper for a book in his honor):

  1. “John Piper:” An opening personal section written by Bethlehem Baptist Church pastors and elders;
  2. “Christian Hedonism”
  3. “The Sovereignty of God”
  4. “The Gospel, the Cross, and the Resurrection of Christ”
  5. “The Supremacy of God in All Things:” A catch-all title to cover a wide array of topics;
  6. “Preaching and Pastoral Ministry”
  7. “Ministries:” Descriptions of the vision and ministries of Desiring God and what is now Bethlehem College and Seminary.

The result is a volume particularly valuable for both pastors and serious students of the Word. Those who are basically familiar with Piper will value the personal insights of his friends and colleagues, and will profit from the attempts to extend his thought by scholars. This book is not an introduction to Christian Hedonism – Desiring God and, even better, When I Don’t Desire God serve that purpose well – but rather an attempt to examine the implications of Christian Hedonism to theology, to the Christian life, and to pastoral ministry. With that understanding, it succeeds marvelously.

Highlights of the book include:

  • David Michael’s 2000+ word prayer in the book’s opening chapter, effectively setting the stage for the remaining chapters.
  • Mark Talbot’s chapter “When All Hope Has Died: Meditations on Profound Christian Suffering” exemplifies the best way to honor another student of the Word. Talbot shows how much he has learned from Piper, and then critiques and modifies his thought. The author argues that the pursuit of our own joy cannot be the sole motivation for following God, claiming that profound “sufferers have abandoned pursuing any pleasure because they have lost all hope of feeling any pleasure again” (p. 96). Yet even those in such situations (like Naomi, Job, and Jeremiah) are able to glorify God: “God is also glorified in us when . . . we continue faithfully to acknowledge and proclaim his truth in spite of the fact that we are unable to conceive how any alteration to our future circumstances could make our lives seem good and pleasurable again” (p. 98). While this chapter would have been even better had it interacted with When I Don’t Desire God – particularly Piper’s chapter, “When the Darkness Will Not Lift” – Talbot gives us a profitable and thought-provoking article.
  • Don Westblade’s chapter analyzes Jonathan Edwards’ wrestling with issues of divine sovereignty and human moral ability. This is a particularly helpful article, worth reading slowly. Edwards (and Westblade) argue that the doctrine of divine sovereignty is rational, even if, as Edwards says, “there may be some things that are true that . . . [are] much above our understandings” (p. 124).
  • Bruce Ware’s chapter on prayer and the sovereignty of God is an excellent analysis of that conundrum. Carefully and engagingly written, this chapter can serve well as the first resource for any serious inquirer about these issues.
  • Don Carson’s chapter “What is the Gospel – Revisited” is perhaps the finest of all. Carson painstakingly surveys the uses of the gospel word group in Scripture, and then examines implications for us today. Along the way he evaluates the slogan, “Preach the Gospel – use words if necessary;” distinguishes between outcomes of the Gospel (for individuals and for society) and the Gospel proper; emphasizes that Kingdom ethics and Kingdom fulfillment cannot be divorced from the plotline of the Gospels; shows that the word “evangelist” in the New Testament refers to anyone who proclaims the Gospel; and offers us this superb paragraph:

The heart of the gospel is what God has done in Jesus, supremely in his death and resurrection. Period. It is not personal testimony about our repentance; it is not a few words about our faith response; it is not obedience; it is not the cultural mandate or any other mandate. Repentance, faith, and obedience are of course essential, and must be rightly related in the light of Scripture, but they are not the good news. The gospel is the good news about what God has done (p. 162).

  • Wayne Grudem’s chapter elaborates on Piper’s The Pleasures of God, which includes a chapter on “The Pleasure of God in Personal Obedience and Public Justice.” Piper based his work primarily on 1 Samuel 15:22, “Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD?” Grudem looks instead at a number of New Testament passages that emphasize God’s joy in our obedience, as we actively depend on Him to work in us. Grudem’s chapter would have been even more helpful had he interacted with the well-known first chapters of Jerry Bridge’s The Discipline of Grace, which argue that we wrongly think we are acceptable to God on our good days.
  • C.J. Mahaney’s chapter begins with Paul’s benediction in 2 Corinthians 13:14, and shows how this summarizes the pastoral ministry: “Through our prayers, our preaching, our counseling, and all facets of our leadership, we must position those we serve to experience the grace of the Son, the love of the Father, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (p. 389). Easily accessible yet profoundly challenging, this chapter is a gem. Every pastor would do well to think hard about the eleven “I must . . .” statements on p. 391.
  • David Powlison’s contribution concerns, not surprisingly, the pastor as counselor. He shows the centrality of counseling –broadly defined – to pastoral ministry, and lays out distinctives between the pastoral task and what the world defines as counseling. A quote from Bonhoeffer serves to summarize the chapter:

Worldly wisdom knows what distress and weakness and failure are, but it does not know the godlessness of man. And so it does not know that man is destroyed only by his sin and can be healed only by forgiveness. Only the Christian knows this. In the presence of a psychiatrist I can only be a sick man; in the presence of a Christian brother I can dare to be a sinner. . . . The psychiatrist views me as if there were no God. The brother views me as I am before the judging and merciful God in the Cross of Jesus Christ (p. 429, quoted from Life Together.)

  • John MacArthur’s chapter considers the maternal and paternal images of the pastor’s role found in 1 Thessalonians 2:7-12. Elaborating on each, MacArthur argues persuasively that every spiritual leader must be both: tender yet uncompromising, compassionate yet firm, affectionate yet in authority.

How could this excellent volume have been even better? Here are four considerations:

First, we honor those whose ideas we take seriously – seriously enough to cause us to think deeply about the subject. That thinking may lead to areas of disagreement, yet that very disagreement honors the author. Other than Mark Talbot’s chapter, the book contains little of this type of analysis. More could have been included. For example, Justin Taylor and Thabiti Anyabwile, in their chapters on Piper’s preaching on the sanctity of life and racial harmony, could profitably have asked: If this type of preaching is exemplary, why do none of the other pastors who contributed to this volume follow Piper’s pattern of preaching one sermon on each of these topics annually? As editor, Taylor could have pursued this line of questioning – and the answers would have been informative.

Second, Scott Hafemann’s contribution is, in many ways, exceptionally helpful and deserving of inclusion in the list of highlights. He walks the reader through Scripture, looking at the concept of the Kingdom of God as manifested from creation to universal worship in the new heavens and new earth. But his definition of Kingdom is problematic – and this problem is especially curious in a volume that honors John Piper. Hafemann defines the central theme of Scripture as “The historical revelation of God’s glory as King through the obedience of his people” (p. 237, his emphasis). “Obedience” must be replaced with “joyful obedience.” Add that word, and this sentence is consistent with Piper and Scripture; leave it out, and the sentence is terribly misleading. Hafemann’s original sentence sounds as if God commands duty rather than delight. Indeed, many today understand obedience to God to be a teeth-clenched, nose-holding, checking-off-a-list rule-keeping that they must do, contrary to their own joy. Piper has shown that obedience of this sort – obedience a la the elder son – is not glorifying to God. Obedience a la the Pharisees is not a picture of the Kingdom. Hafemann could well argue that teeth-clenching obedience is not biblical, and thus not what he intends by the term. Fair enough. But his terminology too easily lends itself to this misinterpretation. Whether we like it or not, in our society the word “obedience” has these connotations of perfunctory rule-keeping. And that has never been God’s object.

Third, the book would have benefited from some interactions among the various authors. For example, Beale and Grudem both interact with texts on justification by faith and their relationship to the way God looks upon the obedience of His people. Hafemann also highlights the centrality of our (joyful!) obedience. Seeing how they would respond to each other would have been valuable. While the challenges of enabling such interaction are large in a book of this type (as opposed to a conference volume), the benefits also might have been high.

Finally, the lack of a chapter on missions to unreached peoples for the glory of God is glaring. Perhaps the editors asked Ralph Winter to write such a chapter, and that remained unfinished at his death. But Let the Nations Be Glad is one of Piper’s most powerful books; indeed, the increasingly influential course “Perspectives on the World Christian Movement” was turned upside down by the ideas of chapter 1 of that volume. Furthermore, one of the key distinctives of Bethlehem as a church is having missions at its core. This emphasis appears too rarely in a book devoted to honoring Piper’s influence. Should the Lord tarry for 100 years, I suspect Piper’s impact on the goal of missions and on reaching the unreached will be his greatest legacy. Furthermore, such a legacy would give him personally the greatest of all joys.

Nevertheless, this is an exceptionally valuable book. Many thanks to the editors and authors for their labors to produce this volume and to keep it secret from Piper until the presentation. Surely this too will serve to spread a passion for the supremacy of God in all things for the joy of all peoples through Jesus Christ. Let the nations be glad!

What Should Eve Have Said to the Serpent?

[This is an excerpt from The God Who is There by D.A. Carson, Chapter 2, “The God Who Does Not Wipe Out Rebels.” – Coty]

According to the last book of the Bible, Satan himself stands behind this serpent in some sense (see Rev. 12). . . . Here we are also told that he was made by God: “the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made” (Gen. 3:1). In other words, the Bible does not set Satan or the serpent up as a kind of anti-God who stands over against God as his equal but polar opposite. . . . [Instead,] the picture painted by the first sentence of this chapter is that even Satan himself is a dependent being, a created being. . . .

We are told . . .  that he was the most crafty of the wild animals that God had made. In many sectors of the English speaking world, the word crafty suggests surreptitiousness, sneakiness. . . . But the word that is used here in Hebrew can be either positive or negative, depending on the context. In many places it is rendered something like “prudence.” . . . I suspect that what is being said is that the serpent, Satan, was crowned with more prudence than all the other creatures but in his rebelling the prudence became craftiness; the very same virtue that was such a strength became twisted into a vice. . . .

The serpent approaches the woman (what the modes of communication were, I have no idea) and avoids offering her a straight denial or a direct temptation. He begins instead with a question: “Did God really say that? Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” Notice what he is doing. He expresses just the right amount of skepticism, a slightly incredulous “Can you really believe that God would say that?” – like an employee asking, “Can you believe what the boss has done this time?” The difference is that the person whose word is being questioned is the maker, the designer, God the sovereign. In some ways the question is both disturbing and flattering. It smuggles in the assumption that we have the ability, even the right, to stand in judgment of what God has said.

Then the devil offers exaggeration. God did forbid one fruit, but the way the serpent frames his question –“Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”- casts God as the cosmic party pooper: “God basically exists to spoil my fun. . . . ”

The woman replies with a certain amount of insight, wisdom, and grace – at least initially. She corrects him on his facts, on his exaggeration: “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden,” she insists (3:2). Then she adds, still correctly, “But God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden’” (3:3, referring back to 2:17). His exaggeration is neatly set aside. But then she adds her own exaggeration. She adds, “and you must not touch it, or you will die” (3:3, emphasis added). God had not said anything about not touching it. It is almost as if the prohibition to eat has got under her skin, making her sufficiently riled up that she has to establish the meanness of the prohibition. The first sin is a sin against the goodness of God.

We gain a little insight into the terrible slippage going on in the woman’s mind if we conjure up what she should have said. Perhaps something like this: “Are you out of your skull? Look around! This is Eden; this is paradise! God knows exactly what he is doing. He made everything; he even made me. My husband loves me and I love him – and we are both intoxicated with the joy and holiness of our beloved Maker. My very being resonates with the desire to reflect something of his spectacular glory back to him. How could I possibly question his wisdom and love? He knows, in a way I never can, exactly what is best – and I trust him absolutely. And you want me to doubt him or question the purity of his motives and character? How idiotic is that? Besides, what possible good can come of a creature defying his Creator and Sovereign? Are you out of your skull?”

Instead, the woman flirts with the possibility that God is . . . bent on limiting the pleasure of his creatures.

Then comes the first overt contradiction of God. The serpent declares, “You will not certainly die” (3:4). The first doctrine to be denied, according to the Bible, is the doctrine of judgment. In many disputes about God and religion this pattern often repeats itself, because if you can get rid of that one teaching, then rebellion has no adverse consequences, and so you are free to do anything.

Far from recognizing the threat of judgment, the serpent holds out that rebellion offers special insight, even divine insight: “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (3:5). Here is the big ploy, the total temptation. The heart of the vicious deceitfulness central to what the serpent promises is that what he says is partly true and totally false. It is true, after all: her eyes will be opened, and in some sense she will see the difference between good and evil. She will determine it for herself. . . . (3:22).

And yet this is an entirely subversive promise. God knows good and evil with the knowledge of omniscience; he knows all that has been, all that is, all that will be, all that might be under different circumstances – he knows it all, including what evil is. But the woman is going to learn about evil by personal experience; she is going to learn about it by becoming evil. . . .

Indeed, the expression in Hebrew, “the knowledge of good and evil,” is often used in places where to have the knowledge of good and evil is to have the ability to pronounce what is good and pronounce what is evil. That’s what God had done. . . . (1:10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). Now this woman wants this God-like function. . . .

To be like God, to achieve this by defying him, perhaps even outwitting him – this is an intoxicating program. This means that God himself must from now on be regarded, consciously or not, as at least a rival and maybe an enemy: “I pronounce my own good, thank you very much, and I do not need you to tell me what I may or may not do.” . . .

We should not think that the serpent’s temptation is nothing more than an invitation to break a rule, arbitrary or otherwise. That is what a lot of people think that “sin” is: just breaking a rule. What is at stake here is something deeper, bigger, sadder, uglier, more heinous. It is a revolution. It makes me god and thus de-gods God.

From D.A. Carson, The God Who is There: Finding Your Place in God’s Story (Baker, 2010), p. 30-33.