The Lord be with you and bless you today.

There are a couple of new Kindle deals for you today.

How to Think about God Promoting His Own Glory

Amy Hall: “Many people misinterpret God’s character when looking at his demands and actions in history because they imagine what they would think of a fallen human being who did the things God has done, and they recoil. Failing to picture God as he is, they picture instead what they’re familiar with—a sinful, human tyrant imposing his preferred laws on people by force, destroying nations, or demanding worship.”

The Many Odd Uses and Abuses of Matthew 18

Keith considers an oddity that often “happens when disagreements and conflict within the body of Christ arise—Matthew 18 seems to become the solitary text of scripture able to be discussed. It is as though the whole enterprise hinges upon that single verse!”

Come, Lord Jesus by John Piper

Crossway has published an important new book by John Piper entitled Come, Lord Jesus: Meditations on the Second Coming of Christ. For the launch, Desiring God has partnered with Westminster Bookstore to offer the hardcover edition at 40% off. (Sponsored Link)

Fighting Forgetfulness

I appreciate Sue’s reflection on how she fights spiritual forgetfulness. “I’m a list maker. But it’s not because I am an efficient, super-organized, home administrator. It’s because I’d otherwise forget.”

Four Reasons Scripture Memory Might Just Be My Favorite Spiritual Discipline

Meanwhile, on a somewhat similar note, Cindy tells why Scripturememorization is her favorite spiritual discipline.

Recovering Proverbs 22:6 for a New Generation

“Years ago, this verse was understood as a discipleship verse. Parents thought, ‘if I train up my child in the Christian faith, then when he is older, he will not depart from that faith.’ It was understood as a promise. As a result of thinking this way, when young people walked away from the faith, these parents felt guilt.”

Photographers, Can You Do Us Cross-Cultural Bloggers a Favor?

Here’s an interesting request: “Could you help out us cross-cultural bloggers? It’s not easy finding good photos for the kind of topics that show up in our writing, and, frankly, it can end up adding a last level of stress before we hit the publish button.”

Flashback: Shedding Tears Over Sorrows That May Never Come

I know God promises grace sufficient for every trial, but only trials that have actually happened, that exist in the real world rather than in the world of fantasy. I know God’s power is made perfect in genuine weakness, not imagined.

God has designed and equipped the Christian life for perseverance that reaches beyond our own benefits…Our faithfulness isn’t just for us. It announces to the world that Jesus is worth every drop of our devotion.

—Glenna Marshall

Download

Share

This week’s deal from Westminster Books is on a book I’d urge all Baptists (and maybe even non-Baptists) to read.

(Yesterday on the blog: What I Want From A Church)

When I Die Young (Or Old)

Vanessa Le considers dying young…or old.

Members who build the body

“Healthy local churches make a powerful and attractive testimony to a watching world. This means that every member has to be devoted to building others up.” Chopo lists some of the people who, as members of the church, build up the body.

The Economics of Abortion in One Lesson

Some people make an economic argument for abortion. Kevin DeYoung responds to it here, saying that “even if abortion made great economic sense, abortion would still be wrong. But let’s think about the economic argument on its own merits.”

10 Absurdities of Atheism

Michael Patton offers 10 absurdities of atheism (plus a bonus 11th).

On Feeling (and Being) Heard

Chris looks at the well-known words of Matthew 18 and considers one of the ways people get around it.

The Self-Righteous Narrative of Abuse

“People who hurt, misuse, and condemn others almost always couch their cruelty in self-righteous language. They twist the truth to make themselves look good, and they do it at the expense of others. Like Adam, they blame their partners for their bad behavior, and like the Pharisees, they create pious narratives and attack anyone who disagrees with them.”

Flashback: Be a Parent Worthy of Honor

Children do not bear the full responsibility of the fifth commandment. If children are to extend honor to their parents, parents are to make it easy for them by living honorable lives.

Sound doctrine and holy living are the marks of true pastors.

—J.C. Ryle

Download

Share

The culture around us may not have much knowledge of the Bible, but everyone still seems to know and freely quote these words: “Judge not.” People may not know much, but they do know that the Bible strictly warns against standing in judgment against anyone else. Christians expend no little effort in explaining how “judge not” is not actually a blanket condemnation of all assessments of another person’s behavior, but a warning against passing judgement too freely, too often, or on the wrong basis.

But for all that, we shouldn’t be too quick to dismiss the force of Jesus’s words. In Luke 6:37 he does, after all, say very simply: “Judge not” and “condemn not.” Just like most explanations of Romans 13 focus more on what the words don’t mean rather than what they do, so too Luke 6:37. (Douglas Moo: “It is only a slight exaggeration to say that the history of the interpretation of Romans 13:1-7 is the history of attempts to avoid what seems to be its plain meaning.”) So what is Jesus saying when he forbids judgment and condemnation (and, as he continues, when he commands forgiveness and generosity)? I think what Jesus is doing here is setting up two different kinds of community. Speaking to his followers with the knowledge that they will soon form themselves into assemblies or churches, he warns against one kind of community while commending another.

Two Kinds of Community

The first community, the one Jesus warns against, has four major characteristics.

• It’s a community of judgment, where people are scrutinizing one another’s lives to look for evidence of sin and failure, and then harshly judging them for what they see there. There’s a lot of nit-picking and ruthlessness going on.
• It’s a community of condemnation, where people are actively looking for each other’s flaws and foibles and then being hard-hearted or compassionless when they spot them.
• It’s a community of resentfulness, where the people are harboring bitterness. They are slow to repent when they’ve sinned against others and even slower to forgive when others have sinned against them.
• It’s a community of selfishness, where each person is looking out primarily for his own interests rather than the interests of others.

That community sounds horrific. It’s judgmental, condemning, resentful, and selfish. We need to ask why. Why is this community marked by such awful behaviors? It can only be because the individual members are marked by such awful behaviors. There is a kind of law of reciprocation going on here—reciprocation is receiving in kind and in quantity what you have sent out. People in the community are being judged because they judge others; people are being condemned because they condemn others; forgiveness comes slowly because forgiveness is granted slowly; no generosity is being received because no generosity is being extended. The community is the people, so the community is like the people. The ungodly character of this community is just a reflection of the ungodly character of its members.

That’s the first option—the community Jesus is warning against. In contrast, here’s the second community which is, of course, the one Jesus is calling for.

• It’s a community of acceptance where people accept each other and are very slow to criticize. If there is any great scrutinizing going on, it’s people scrutinizing their own lives rather than each other’s.
• It’s a community of compassion, where people still see each other’s flaws and foibles, but they respond to them with warm hearts, with compassion, with patience.
• It’s a community of forgiveness where people are quick to come to others to say “please forgive me” and where they are quick to grant forgiveness when asked for it.
• It’s a community of generosity, where it’s normal for its members to experience the generosity of others, whether that’s being generous with money or time or attention or anything else someone may need.

This community sounds beautiful, doesn’t it? It’s accepting and compassionate and forgiving and generous. And again we need to ask why. Why is the community marked by these wonderful behaviors? It’s because the individuals are marked by these wonderful behaviors. That same law of reciprocation is going on here. People are not being judged because they are not judging others; they are not feeling harsh condemnation because they are not condemning others; forgiveness comes to them quickly because forgiveness comes from them quickly; they are receiving generosity because they’ve given generosity. Again, the community is the people, so the community is like the people. The godly character of this community is just a reflection of the godly character of its members.

Jesus’s point and purpose here is not to tell Christians they must never identify sin in other people. In fact, a passage like Matthew 18 says that this is imperative to the health of the local church community. Rather, he is warning against a spirit of judgmentalism that can pervade a church, a spirit of condemnation that can mark a congregation. And that spirit begins with you, the individual.

If you personally are in the habit of standing in harsh judgement of other people in your church, you are helping to create and to foster a church-wide spirit of judgmentalism. If you criticize people, rant about them, cut them down, grumble about them, condemn them in your own heart, you’re not just doing that as an individual but as a part of a church. And then you shouldn’t be surprised when other people in the church make harsh judgments toward you. Why? Because you’ve helped create that culture in the church!

The simple fact is, the church is the people so the church will be like the people. The church is you, so the church will be like you. You choose day by day what your church community will be like, and you choose through your own behavior.

Whatever else we learn about church life, we learn quickly that it will at times come with conflict. We are, after all, sinful people attempting to share community with other sinners. It’s inevitable that problems will arise, inevitable that there will be angry words, unfortunate misunderstandings, unintentional insults. While there will be many great blessings that come through the local church, there will also be real sorrows.

Thankfully, God has not left us unequipped when it comes to dealing with those conflicts in a healthy and healing way. Solomon says, “Good sense makes one slow to anger, and it is his glory to overlook an offense,” while Peter echoes, “Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins” (Proverbs 19:11; 1 Peter 4:8). The great majority of offenses are to be overlooked, covered in love and forgotten. But sometimes the offense is serious and the harm grave, and in these times we are to follow the instructions of Jesus in Matthew 18:15-20.

This text establishes the God-ordained process through which a person who has been sinned against can identify that sin to the offender and see a strained, separated, or full-out shattered relationship restored. It’s a simple process. First approach the person alone, describe the offense, and give him or her the opportunity to express remorse and seek forgiveness. Failing that, bring it to the attention of two or three witnesses, and then to the whole church. If even then the person does not repent, the lack of remorse should stand as proof that he or she is not a Christian and should be removed from the membership of the local church. Christians, after all, are to “be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you” (Ephesians 4:32). Those who refuse to seek forgiveness from others prove that they have not experienced forgiveness from God.

This process should be familiar to any member of any local church. When a pastor is approached by church members who have been aggrieved in one way or another, his first response should be to direct them to this text, trusting that it is God’s means to achieve relational reconciliation. And most often it does just that.

Yet we need to be careful, as this process can sometimes be used improperly. It can be used too often and a culture of hen-pecking can grow up in which no one is willing to overlook any offense. It can be used too seldom and a culture of fear-of-man can grow up in which people refuse to confront even the most egregious sin. It can be used too widely so it is applied to criminal offenses that are rightly the jurisdiction of the state, not the church. It can be abandoned altogether in favor of worldly methods of peacemaking that eschew the divine wisdom behind this one. But it can also be used heavy-handedly, and this is where it’s important to set it within its context.

While we sometimes summarize this process as “Matthew 18,” as in, “Have you followed Matthew 18?” it’s actually just one small part of a larger chapter and a much larger book. Though it is helpful to excerpt these verses and to follow them as a self-standing process, it’s a process provided within a context and it’s crucial that we don’t lose that. As we back up to the beginning of the chapter, we see Jesus addressing the disciples as they bicker about which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. He calls them to be counter-culturally humble and child-like. Next we see Jesus calling for the kind of self-examination and radical action that would see us prefer to lose a hand or an eye than to use either one for a sinful purposes. Then we come to the parable of the lost sheep which describes the broken-heartedness and loving care of the shepherd who seeks out his lost little lamb and who rejoices when he finds it.

Then, and only then, do we come to this process or method of reconciliation. When Jesus tells how to restore relationships, he has laid a table of tenderness. He has established a context of gentleness. He has told of the necessity of a kind of healthy-self doubt that acknowledges how blind we can be to our own faults. He will soon go on to tell that we must be willing to forgive others not once or twice, but an infinite number of times. The process in its context looks very different from the process torn from context.

As we consider this process as part of a wider text, we see that it is all about love. It’s not a hammer to be smashed down on the head of an offender. It’s not a means of gaining power over another person by demanding or withholding forgiveness. It’s not a means through which a church’s leadership can manipulate its members with the threat of excommunication. Rather, it’s a form of love, the tender pursuit of another person’s good with the offense merely providing the necessity and opportunity. It’s imitating the loving shepherd as he sets out to find and bring back his sheep. It’s expressing humility and protecting unity. It’s love and to be done in love.

Thus, if the process is carried out in a heavy-handed way, it’s being carried out wrong. If it’s being carried out in a threatening or unloving manner, it’s being carried out wrong. It’s only right and only consistent with the words and will of Jesus if it’s marked by love.

Today’s Kindle deals include some classics that are worth looking at.

(Yesterday on the blog: My Favorite “Minor” Museums)

The Industrial Revolution of Shame

Wow. “We are undergoing an industrial revolution in shame. New technologies have radically expanded our ability to make and distribute a product. The product is our judgment of one another. As in past industrial revolutions, the mass manufacture and use of a product previously available to just a few or in small amounts has given us the power to do harm at a previously unthinkable scale.”

Christian Wisdom Amid the Gurus

Samuel James has some interesting analysis here. “To ignore the dynamics into which these gurus write and speak seems to be a way of ensuring that the chaff never gets peeled from the wheat. For good or ill, Hollis, Peterson, and Ramsey are resonating with millions of people, many of whom are Christian, with messages of taking responsibility for life, letting go of shame and excuses, and believing that a better future is possible. Gurus exist to fill gaps—intellectual gaps, emotional gaps, spiritual gaps, etc. How they fill those gaps matters, but the gaps themselves matter too.”

Single Mothers And Their Triune God

And now from another Samuel. “Mom explained it all to me when I was a boy. She was a single mother, but she wasn’t alone. The man of the house abandoned us. But the God of the house wouldn’t forsake us. Mom was a single mother with multiple divine persons who protected her household. Mom was a single mother with a triune God.”

Why a Cat Always Lands on its Feet (Video)

Just like the description says…

On Saying Goodbye

“While we don’t think too theologically when we say the word, perhaps we should. God be with you is acknowledging that from now on, I’m not with you. Goodbyes are the end of relational presence and being physically together. When we are physically present we are able to watch over each other and care for each other. Verbal and non-verbal communication is instantaneous.”

The Goldilocks Principle and Church Size

Joe Carter points out how unexamined assumptions often drive church planting. “I suspect we could do a better job in thinking about how we think about numbers. For example, before we can understand what it means to say a church has plateaued or declined in attendance, we should be able to answer the question, ‘What size should a church be?'”

Matthew 18 is Not Instructive for Book Reviews, But Much of the New Testament Is

Jen Oshman deals something that happens whenever a Christian critically reviews a book. “‘Did you contact the author privately before you posted the review?’ I’ve received this question several times over the last couple weeks, following my review of Rachel Hollis’s most recent book, Girl, Stop Apologizing. The question invokes the well-known, but oft-misunderstood, church discipline passage in Matthew 18:15-20.”

Flashback: 5 Reasons to Rejoice in Persecution

There are at least two ways that God tests you in times of persecution: He tests the genuineness of your faith, and he tests the maturity of your faith.

Trials are intended to make us think—to wean us from the world—to send us to the Bible—to drive us to our knees.

—J.C. Ryle

Download

Share

It’s the age of the expert, the age of the specialist. And sure enough, there’s a growing theme in the Christian world that experience is a necessary prerequisite to authority. If you want to know about parenting, you need to talk to a parent. If you want to know about marriage, you need to talk to someone who has been married. If you want to know how to suffer well, you speak to someone who has suffered.

This theme is prevalent and attractive. And while there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with it, I think it carries a subtle danger. It tells us that authority comes through experience. Yet as Christians, we must insist that authority is not derived first from experience, but from Scripture. Greater than our need for people who have experienced it in their lives, is our need for people who will teach it from the Word.

Now, let’s be careful. Let’s not over-react. I believe in the value of people committing themselves to studying and understanding a particular area of life or theology. I believe in the value of books and conferences and other contexts for specialized teaching. There is tremendous benefit in learning from someone who has been there and done that. But we don’t need such people. And it’s not like they are not qualified to teach or lead or counsel because of the experiences they’ve gone through. Their experience is valuable to us only to the degree that it is consistent with what God makes clear in his Word.

You may need to know how to resolve conflict. How can you pursue peace with someone who has harmed you? How can you repent and bring about reconciliation with people you’ve harmed? You could turn to advice columnists or experts in human relationships. You could even turn to a distinctly Christian reconciliation ministry. But your first instinct should be to find a man with an open Bible! Have him lead you verse-by-verse through Matthew 18 and teach you divine wisdom for healing broken relationships. He may not have much experience, but he can teach with authority because he is going to the best and highest source.

You may need to know how to raise your children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. You could go to the bookstore and get some reading on the subject. You could sign up for a conference. Well and good. But first and better, turn to a woman in your church who will open her Bible with you, who will take you to the relevant passages, and who will help you understand what God says.

It’s a joy to attend a marriage seminar led by a man who speaks with wisdom earned by long experience. But it’s even better to speak to a man who has great confidence in his Bible. It’s far better to hear a sermon on marriage by an unmarried man with an open Bible than an experienced husband who brings nothing more than his own wisdom.

The fact is, an orphan can teach how to care for aging parents. An unmarried man can teach on marriage. A childless woman can teach on parenting. A poor man can teach about the temptations that come with being rich. God’s Word speaks to every one of these issues and authority in these matters does not flow from experience but from Scripture. Any Christian can teach these things confidently and powerfully because the confidence and power come not through experience or accolades, but from the source. The job of the teacher is not first to speak of or out of his experiences, but to speak of and out of the Word.

In the Bible we see both grumbing and lamenting. It seems that one is permitted by God and one is not. So what is the difference?

Transcript

Today I want to take on a question I got from somebody who’s watched some of these videos. Sent through a question I thought was quite interesting. It was essentially about the difference between lament and grumbling. So let me read the question. What is the difference between the complaining or murmuring we’re not supposed to do, and that includes two texts, Philippians 2, verse 14, and 1st Corinthians 10, verse 10, and lamenting like we see in the Psalms? I’ll tip my cards and say, I think the main difference is pride and humility. Let me tell you how we get there.

The first text he includes is Philippians chapter 2, 14 to 15. The context of Philippians, Paul himself is suffering, he’s in chains, he’s writing to a church that’s going through a tough time, perhaps persecution, if not, it may be coming soon. And then, in the midst of that kind of outside attack, there’s also some inside stuff going on. There’s these two women who are duking it out and probably having people join sides with them, so there’s this disunity in the church that’s coming from within. The church is being attacked from outside, eroded from within. In that context, he has calls for unity in the letter including this, “Do all things without grumbling or disputing, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation.” Seems to me that the grumbling he’s talking about right there is not so much against God, as in lament, but it’s against other people. So I think what he’s warning against there is grumbling, which we might say is people attacking one another behind their backs and disputing, which is attacking one another face to face. Something along those lines. So I don’t think this is quite on point to your question then, I think this text more just shows that there will be disunity within the church and then, of course, we have other passages in scripture, how to deal with that. You deal with disunity, you deal with being sinned against by overlooking an offense or by following the principles of Matthew 18.

So, let’s look to the second text, 1st Corinthians chapter 10, verses 9 to 10, we read, “We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer.” Now, this is clearly grumbling against God and it shows us this is a serious offense which has had in the past serious consequences. The warning to us is clear, we must not grumble against God. And yet we have these Psalms of lament. We have these Psalms where people, individuals or communities are crying out to God and saying, we don’t understand whats going on, please God make this stop. So, Psalm 44, “Awake Lord, why do you sleep, rouse yourself, do not reject us forever.” Some of these Psalms of lament are whole communities, some of these Psalms of lament are individuals protesting individual circumstances. But, in each one of them, it’s people crying out to God and saying, we don’t know what’s going on, we want you to make it stop.

Now, what’s the difference between sinful grumbling and sinless lament? These Psalms of lament would not be in the Scripture if they were teaching us to do something sinful. Right, so we learn, there is a way we can lament our circumstances before God. What’s the difference? I think the difference is humility and pride. The difference, I think, is acknowledging that if we’re sinlessly lamenting our circumstances, I think we’re crying out to God in a posture of humility. If we’re sinfully grumbling against God, we’re crying out in a posture of sinful arrogance. Right, if we’re doing that, we’re not acknowledging all we know to be true about God. We’re not acknowledging God’s kindness, His goodness, His mercy, His love. Ultimately, we’re denying His Gospel. We’re denying or failing to acknowledge that Jesus Christ bled and died for us. That He has saved us, He has redeemed us, He has good purposes for us. We’re denying God’s providence, that in some way, He has arranged the world, He has arranged our lives, He’s arranged circumstances in this way so that we are facing this situation. And we’re also failing to acknowledge that God is working all things for good, even if we don’t like the circumstance, even if we wouldn’t have chosen it, even if we’re lamenting it. If we’re grumbling, we’re not acknowledging that God is working even this for our good and His glory.

And so, when we find ourselves in these difficult circumstances, people are attacking us, we’re in a time of persecution, in a time of pain, of searching, of questioning, we need to remember the promises of God. Remember, God has promised He will never leave us nor forsake us and I’d like to borrow here a phrase I learnt from a friend of mine. He preached at our church, his name is Dan McDonald and he preached a sermon and he used the phrase, Gospel weariness. I found it so, so helpful to think about the fact that life is difficult and the longer we live in this world the more we’re exposed to the pain of it. And hopefully as Christians, the more we get this real weariness, but this Gospel weariness, where we are confident that there will be an end to this pain, whether that’s personal or just all the mess we see in the world around us. Through the Gospel, we can have that weariness that looks to a good future. We can lament our circumstances, but hopefully with humility, looking forward to the great end when Christ will return, when all of this will be done away with. There will be no more reason for lament, no more pain.

So, the big difference, I believe, between sinful grumbling and sinless lament is simply humility

Today’s Kindle deals include a few titles you’ll definitely want to take a peek at.

(Yesterday on the blog: Sex on the Silver Screen: A Scenario to Consider)

Shouldn’t We Share Our Concerns About a Book Directly with the Author Instead of in the Public Forum?

Randy Alcorn is about the kindest person you’ll meet, so his words count for a lot here. “Matthew 18 addresses the need to go to people privately when they’ve sinned against us, or perhaps when we’ve sinned against them. But I’ve never read a book where I think the author has sinned against me, or I’ve sinned against the author. The author publicly takes a stand, so any ideas in the book are subject to public disagreement.”

Revoice, Evangelical Culture, and the Return of an Old Friend

Here’s another solid response to the Revoice Conference and what it all means. “Paul was well aware of the existence of wicked slanderers within the visible church. That is why he made it clear that no accusation against an elder should be taken remotely seriously without evidence from two or three eye-witnesses, 1Tim. 5:19. Hearsay or gossip is irrelevant. To act on such is simply not Christian and those who do so should hang their heads in shame for the malicious harm they do. Mob rule by the (self) righteous is still mob rule.”

Torn Between Two Cultures? Revoice, LGBT Identity, and Biblical Christianity

Al Mohler: “We should take the organizers of Revoice at their word and hear what they are saying. We should lament the brokenness and understand the many failings of the Christian church toward those who identify with the LGBTQ+ community. But we dare not add yet another failure to those failures. We cannot see Revoice as anything other than a house built upon the sand. Revoice is not the voice of faithful Christianity. See also Denny Burk, who writes, Revoice is over. Now what?

How Fuses and Circuit Breakers Work (Video)

“Ask This Old House electrician Scott Caron demonstrates how fuses and circuit breakers protect a home.” I found it interesting. Also, our old house still uses fuses!

6 Warning Signs Of A Bad Pastor And Spiritual Abuse

“More and more, it’s critically important to be able to identify dangerous, destructive pastors BEFORE everything falls apart. Few things cause Christians to become disillusioned more than being ripped to pieces by a really bad pastor. Few things do more to sully the name of Jesus more than abusive spiritual leaders.”

The Babies At the Fringes of Fertility Tech – Future Human

“Forty years after the birth of Louise Brown, the first ‘test-tube baby,’ we are living in a golden age of fertility tech.” But, naturally, people seem much less concerned with the morality of the technology!

Flashback: The Lingering Stench of Sin

We are regularly called upon to respond to situations that are difficult or even excruciating. How can we respond? How should we respond? What’s the best way to bring hope, to bring healing?

What’s Your Foundation?

This week the blog is sponsored by The Gospel Project. Sponsors play a key role in keeping this site running, so I’m thankful for each and every one of them.

Satan’s greatest success is in making people think they have plenty of time before they die to consider their eternal welfare.

—John Owen

Download

Share

To the modern ear, the notion of church membership can sound odd, intimidating, or even abusive. Should we care about church membership and, if so, why?

Transcript

Why do I need to be a member of a church? Can’t I just attend and be involved?

There’s a couple of great benefits to church membership. The first is the commitment of yourself to a group of people. I want to be clear, when you’re becoming a member of a church, you’re not becoming a member of some abstract entity. What you’re doing is becoming a member of a body, you’re becoming part of a body. The body is people. So, you’re adjoining yourself to people. So in church membership, you’re saying, you are the people whom I am particularly choosing to love, to use my gifts to serve. On the other hand, you’re joining into this church and inviting those people to particularly serve you. And so as Christians, yes we owe love to all man and we owe special love to all Christians, but each one of us has to have a focus, we can’t love everyone equally. And so church membership is really our way of saying, I’m setting my focus on you, you’re setting your focus on me.

Another great benefit is the benefit of discipline. Now, that sounds like a bad thing but, because church membership has an in, it also has an out. You can be put out of church membership. And I think when we’re at our best in life spiritually, we join a church and really see the value of it. But when we’re at our worst, that’s where the church discipline can be a huge means of grace in our life where a church is coming to us and saying, are you following the Lord? We don’t think you’re following the Lord. If you don’t turn from this sin and repent we’ll have to put you out of the membership. I think that can be a means, and we’ve seen this in our church, a means God uses to turn us away from our sin and draw us back to ourselves. So, many many benefits of being a member of a church.

What does the Bible say about church membership?

If you go reading through the New Testament, you won’t find chapter and verse that says you must be a member of a church, you won’t find the word, church membership anywhere in the New Testament. But that’s not to say it isn’t described, not to say we don’t see it in there. I think one of the clearest ways we see it, is in Matthew 18, where Jesus is talking about conflict resolution and ultimately about a kind of church discipline. And what we see there, is that the end of the path of discipline is putting people out. So they’re treated as gentiles and tax collectors. Which is to say, treated as unbelievers. But in order to be put out of that body, they must first have been in. Not everybody’s in, just those who have chosen to be in. So I think we see there some idea of membership. Some people have chosen to associate themselves with a church, put themselves under the authority of certain leaders, now they’re being put out.

We see in Paul’s letter to Timothy, talking about widows, and some are enrolled. Which would seem to say, there’s some, there’s many widows in the community, there might be some attending the church, but there’s a few particular ones who are enrolled because presumably, they’re members of the church. And we see this throughout the New Testament, this idea that there’s some who are in, some who are out. Those who are in, are the ones who have really committed themselves to that local church.

Is it a sin for a Christian to not be a church member?

It may be a sin to not be a church member. And I would think it starts to get into the realm of sin the longer we refuse to be church members. So, one of the things we need in order to be a member of a church is a church that has a meaningful sense of church membership and many churches don’t. So, there’s many churches out there where they’re perfectly content to have you in the church without being a member. I think that’s a flaw within the structure of that church. There’s many other churches where you can be a member of the church, but that doesn’t really mean anything, there’s no real significance to it.

So, not only do we need to be members of a church, we need churches that take membership seriously, that are very intentional and purposeful in their understanding of membership. So, my counsel to you is to understand, from the Bible and go to the Bible and search it out, read some good books and say, yes I believe in church membership. I believe this is something God calls me to. And then seek out a church that takes membership seriously, that has a meaningful sense of what it means to be a member of the church. If you have high expectations of membership and that church has high expectations, that’s where I think, okay, now you’re honoring the Lord as you join that church and join into the full membership with all its responsibilities and all its privileges.

Sometimes young people have a lot of push back to the idea of church membership. Why do you think that is?

I think there’s a lot in play when it comes to young people and church membership. There is a kind of real autonomy or a radical autonomy, at least in western culture right now, where each one of us is alone in life, each one of us ought to be making our own way through life and joining with other people kind of reduces my autonomy and, you know, sort of slows me down as I get hung up with other people and other people’s problems.

So, and I think there’s also been a number of cases in the news and the media about what would be almost abusive authority within churches. Almost cult-like mentalities within churches where the spiritual authorities are abusing their authority, they’re going too far and taking advantage of people. So, I think young people then, are quite suspicious of church membership.

Not only that, I think most have not seen it modeled well. Most haven’t been called to a meaningful church membership. So it’s very much the experience in our church, that if we make membership meaningful, so we as a church agree, this is what it means to be a member, and there’s a high bar there. We really have expectations of one another, and we’re really going to give to one another, and we call younger people, and older people to raise the bar in that sense, to come to that level. I think people will rise to that. When we make membership almost meaningless, well, of course, people can’t get enthusiastic about it, of course, they don’t take it seriously. But when we really encourage them to something meaningful, something that will really help them in the Christian life, something that has privileges, but also something that has responsibilities. I think young people take it seriously, especially when we back it all up with scripture. This isn’t just us, we’re showing you from the Bible where it calls you to this. And then calling you not just to obey us. We’re calling you ultimately to obey God.

It’s a rare week now when we do not learn of some new charge against a pastor. The world has gotten smaller than ever and information moves at a greater pace than at any other point in history. In such a world, news travels fast and furious. Especially bad news. And we do love our bad news, don’t we? In such a world, heroes rise and fall in hours or even moments. And we do love to raise up and tear down, don’t we?

The Bible gives us clear guidance when it comes to bad news about pastors. In 1 Timothy 5, Paul instructs Timothy—and through him the church of all times at all ages—how to deal with accusations against them. “Do not admit a charge against an elder,” he says, “except on the evidence of two or three witnesses” (9).

There are a couple of things we ought to notice here. The first is that in some ways, elders are held to the same standard as any other believer. The Old Testament burden of proof for accusations was two or three witnesses. Philip Ryken summarizes in this way: “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.” This level of proof stretches also into the New Testament. Jesus himself maintained this standard in his instruction about confronting sin in another believer (see Matthew 18:15-20).

The second thing we need to see is that in one way elders are given a slightly different standard than other believers in cases of accusations. The instruction for every Christian indicates that charges are established (or proven) on the evidence of two or three witnesses, whereas for elders the charges may not even be admitted (or considered) except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. It is clear: the testimony of a single witness cannot be the determining factor in charging a pastor with wrongdoing.

Why this difference? Presumably, because pastors are a special object of satanic attack. In general, much more damage can be done to a church by scandal involving a pastor than scandal involving a member. In general, the path to doing the greatest harm to a church is the path that leads through the leaders. Therefore, pastors need special protection. Calvin takes a pessimistic but not entirely unrealistic position when he says this: “… as soon as any charge is made against ministers of the Word, it is believed as surely and firmly as if it had been already proved. This happens not only because a higher standard of integrity is required from them, but because Satan makes most people, in fact nearly everyone, overcredulous so that without investigation, they eagerly condemn their pastors whose good name they ought to be defending.”

So what path do we follow if we have a grievance against a pastor or believe we have witnessed him sinning in a grievous way? We follow the guidance of Matthew 18 by going to him on our own, to confront his sin and call him to repent. (Though if there has been criminal wrongdoing we ought to follow the laws of our lands which may involve immediately reporting him to the appropriate authorities.) If after that meeting we are still convinced that he has sinned and remains unrepentant, we take one or two others with us and confront him a second time. It is only now that we have gathered the necessary two or three witnesses that we are to make that sin known to the other leaders in the church. It is only now that those leaders should be willing to hear and evaluate the accusations.

From this little passage in Paul’s letter we come to two clear conclusions. First, as long as the church inhabits this sinful world, we must expect to encounter pastors who violate trust, prove their lack of godly character, and invalidate their ministry. When we have the evidence of two or three witnesses, we must carefully evaluate accusations and, if they are sustained, to move boldly to remove these men from their positions. To do that in a biblical manner, we simply need to follow the instruction in the very next verse: “As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.” Second, as long as the church inhabits this sinful world, we must also expect to encounter pastors who love their people, prove their godly character, carry out their ministry, and yet who are unfairly charged with the most egregious offenses. Until those accusations come from multiple witnesses, we must refuse to hear them and move boldly to affirm these men in their positions.

Today’s Kindle deals include an interesting little mix of books.

Another Actress Accuses Kirk Cameron Of Treating Her With Respect

I don’t often link to the satire site The Babylon Bee, but this one is worth reading in the light of all the recent scandal in Hollywood.

Pastoring a Rural Church Isn’t a “Lesser” Ministry

Cheston Pickard speaks about important similarities in rural and urban churches to show that pastoring in the country is not a lesser kind of ministry.

Is There a Different Process of Church Discipline for Elders?

“Most people are aware of the process of church discipline outlined in Matthew 18 (vv. 15-18). In order to promote the purity of the church and the testimony of the gospel, Christians must ensure that the other members of their church are living in a way that reflects submission to Christ’s rule. If someone continues in serious and outward sin then they are to be put out of the church or removed from the membership by means of discipline.But a question often arises, concerning elders. Is there a separate process for the discipline of elders outlined in 1 Timothy 5?”

How Does Your Body Know You’re Full? (Video)

“Hunger claws at your belly. It tugs at your intestines, which begin to writhe, aching to be fed. Being hungry generates a powerful and often unpleasant physical sensation that’s almost impossible to ignore. After you’ve reacted by gorging on your morning pancakes, you start to experience an opposing force: fullness. But how does your body actually know when you’re full?” This video explains.

How to Secure Attendance at a Prayer Meeting

There is lots of wisdom here: “R.J. George wrote a three-volume set entitled Lectures in Pastoral Theology that contains a treasure trove of pastoral advice. In his second volume, entitled Pastors and People, he explains with wisdom, care, quaintness, and even some humor how a pastor should go about encouraging people to come to a prayer meeting.”

Conflict, Comfort and the Cross

“Last week, a gunman entered First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas and killed 26 people, wounding 20 others. The massacre was brutal and left what will surely be scars on all of those who survived, many of whom were young children. Usually there is some sort of grieving period that decorum allows in the aftermath of such events, but as civilization abandons any pretense at care or compassion that grieving period is quickly disappearing.”

10 Things You Should Learn About Pride and Humility From Jonathan Edwards

“No one has spoken with greater clarity on the nature of both pride and humility than Jonathan Edwards. Here are ten things we can learn from him.”

Inventing the Christian Priesthood

Philip Jenkins begins to examine where the priesthood came from in the early church.

Flashback: Don’t Waste Your Ambition

Ambition is good, but it needs to be strengthened by at least two other crucial traits: character and self-discipline. When I look at your generation, I love the ambition I see, but want to encourage you to pursue the traits that will harness that ambition to the best and highest purposes.

Definitions of liberation not drawn from the Word of God will always fall short of true liberation.

—Carl Ellis Jr.

Download

Share

I continue to receive lots of Letters to the Editor, hence I continue to attempt to answer lots of Letters to the Editor. Here’s a new batch that include answers to questions on family devotions, whether church is for believers or unbelievers, Christian comedy, if and how women can serve in the church, and so on. I hope you find them helpful.

Could you suggest several options for material to help me stay on track leading family devotions with my wife and myself? We start well but it never lasts.

Probably, but I’m not going to. I’m not going to because I think you’re looking in the wrong place. I’ll shoot straight: It’s not a resource flaw but a character flaw; it’s not a lack of resources but a lack of self-control.

We are creatures of habit and I’m convinced this is a feature of our humanity rather than a bug. The reason you do not do family devotions right now is that you have not yet established the habit. To the contrary, you probably have other habits that interfere with your desire to do devotions together. You get started in building a new habit, but are unable to overcome the competing ones that are already well-established. The key to family devotions, then, is to build it as a habit. Here are some tips:

1. Grow in your conviction that family devotions are important. Don’t do them simply to assuage your guilt or to be able to brag to friends. Pray, study the Bible, and come to a solid conviction that God calls you to them.
2. Establish a time and place in which you plan to do your family devotions. Make sure it is a time and place you can count on being present and being together just about every day (such as immediately before breakfast or immediately after dinner). Decide how many days a week you’ll do them.
3. Decide on a pattern for your family devotions. At minimum, read a short passage of the Bible together and then pray. You can also add discussion or a devotional book or singing or anything else that fits your family. My counsel, though, is to begin with something short and simple, then to add length and complexity later on.
4. Exercise the self-control necessary to ensure you do them consistently enough to build a habit. Most people find it takes a month or two to establish a new habit, so expect to encounter some resistance early on. They will probably be simple for the first few days, tough for the next few weeks, and then gradually become easier and easier until they are suddenly the most natural thing in the world.

It’s really that simple. As a Christian, you have been indwelled by the Holy Spirit who promises to give you the good gift of self-control (Galatians 5:23). He is eager to help you exercise this gift. So in his strength begin this new habit, then build it, maintain it, and enjoy it.

I am wondering what your view is on who should be welcomed into a church. I used to think of church as a place for Christians to invite the lost to—an outreach. But lately I have seen that this often leads to the lost hijacking the church and this destroys church community and unity. The Bible mentions not having anything to do with some people. So what happens if they are at your church? How to “unwelcome” them at that point? I have even heard of instances where people purposefully attend a church while living an unbiblical lifestyle, simple to divide and conquer. I’ve begun to view church as something just for Christians. Can you share your thoughts on this?

I am convinced that church is primarily for Christians. Not only that, but church is primarily for Christians who are members of that local body. While guests (whether believers or unbelievers) are to be welcomed in, church exists primarily for the benefit of those Christians who make that church their home. This is in contradiction to the church growth movement which changed long-standing notions of church to make services all about unbelievers.

I believe the Bible makes it clear that churches are to be structured around membership. While there is no text that teaches this directly, we find several that discuss the distinction between people who are inside the body and people who are outside. Texts like Matthew 18 with its discussion of discipline are pretty much meaningless if we do not have an established body that people can join as Christians and be removed from if they prove themselves non-Christians. When a church has meaningful membership, it acknowledges there are essentially two kinds of people in the worship service on a Sunday morning: members and guests. Just as a family may welcome guests into its home, the church welcomes guests into its services. But like the home belongs to the family and exists primarily for their shelter and comfort, the church belongs to the members and exists primarily for their benefit.

There is an important implication here: Church services are not first a place for evangelism. Under normal circumstances, the primary purpose of a worship service is not to save the lost, but to edify and encourage the saved. While I trust and hope that the pastor preaches the free offer of the gospel each and every Sunday, still the primary audience for his sermon and the rest of the service is Christians. The ultimate hope is that believing guests either join the church as members or move to another one and that unbelieving guests soon come to faith and likewise join the membership.

There is much more I could say here, but I’d recommend doing some reading at 9Marks.org since that ministry has done more than any other to promote the kind of paradigm I have attempted to describe here.

I wanted to know your opinion about Christian comedy. I’ve never seen you write about that particularly, so would appreciate your input. While it can be fun watching Skit Guys or Tim Hawkins sometimes, or read The Babylon Bee, it always leaves me with a feeling that there is something wrong with these, especially in light of Psalm 1:1 (“Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers.”). It appears there is a thin line between humor and mockery and I have to say I believe in many instances the above-mentioned do cross those lines.

I’m not sure that Psalm 1 is the place to turn to. The scoffers of Psalm 1 are not people who crack jokes and satirize others, but people who deny God, either by their words or actions. If I were to make an argument along such lines, I’d probably turn to Ephesians 5:4: “Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.” This instruction is not quite on-point either, but you may be able to get there through implication and application. I might also turn to the various examples of ministry in the Old and New Testament, none of which depended exclusively (or even more than occasionally) on humor.

When it comes to humor, I’d want to first acknowledge that it is a gift of God. I see no reason to believe it is wrong to create or enjoy humor. If Jesus was fully human, we can be sure that he enjoyed a good belly-laugh every now and again. We have to utterly strip him of his humanity to believe he and the disciples never enjoyed a joke from time to time. Humor is a gift of God and is also sometimes a useful and appropriate means of making a point. Consider Elijah mocking the pagan prophets by suggesting that their god was not responding to their pleas because he was sitting on the toilet with his pants around his ankles. Or consider Jesus using absurdity and exaggeration to make a point in his sermons and parables. Humor has its place.

However, any gift can be misused, and humor is no exception. Thus I would want to be very careful about how I express it and what I intend to accomplish by it. Whatever else Ephesians 5 says, it warns we must not be crude. That means our joking must not tip into the dirty or sexual and must not use as a punchline those things Christ had to die for. Additionally, it must not be unloving or unkind. It must be in keeping with the commands that we show due respect to those who are older than us and that we honor governmental rulers and other leaders. There must be boundaries around our humor.

As it pertains to the Skit Guys, Tim Hawkins, or The Babylon Bee, I can’t say that any of them are wrong or unbiblical. However, I expect each one of them would admit there have been times when they’ve crossed a line and had to repent. I trust that each of them is aware of the specific temptations toward sin that come with those who try to be funny.

I believe there is an ongoing struggle in church about what to do with women and their gifts. The pattern I see is that a liberal denomination is fine with women pastors but that the conservatives, in order to show their biblical disagreement swing the pendulum the other way, permit women to do almost nothing beyond children’s ministry and maybe a women’s Bible study). It’s like women are to serve but not be heard from. We are all created in the image of God and we hear often from males created by God, but when do we hear from the feminine voice? Are women’s gifts needed, appreciated, or used in the more conservative churches?

It was Martin Luther who compared Christians to a drunk man trying to ride a horse. He climbs up, falls off one side, scrambles back up, and falls off the other. The point is that we are prone to go too far first in one direction and then in the other. Today I think some churches—and perhaps even many churches—have overcompensated when it comes to the roles of women in the life of the local church. And, without excusing this, I do think we can explain it. I’ll share my theory.

If we dial the clock back a few years, we come to a time when denominations were breaking apart over the issue of women in ministry. A good number of churches had come to the conviction that they ought to ordain women, and this caused a lot of dispute and grief. Many traditional congregations had to separate from their denominations and, as they did so, they defined themselves in opposition to egalitarian theology. I believe that some of them were so attuned to issues of women in ministry that they perhaps got over-protective of their position. Now any notion of a woman being at the front of the room or taking on any position of leadership (even if non-ordained) was considered a sure sign of the slippery slope to egalitarianism. While such a notion may be wrong-headed, I believe it is understandable within its context.

The way this worked out in many churches is that there came to be a kind of “demilitarized zone” between biblical convictions and actual practice. There was a kind of buffer or safe zone meant to protect against anything that even hinted at egalitarianism. While the elders in a church may have considered it biblically-acceptable to have a woman pray during a worship service, they may have prohibited it just to be safe or just to leave no doubt that they were not an egalitarian congregation.

Time has passed and I think quite a lot of churches are re-examining their position. This is not to say they are dabbling with egalitarianism, but that they are examining what it means to be fully complementarian! They are attempting to come to firmer convictions on the few ministries that are reserved for properly-qualified males and the many that are open to all members, whether male or female. As they do this, they are inviting women to participate in every role and ministry that God invites them to be part of. I believe our churches will be healthier for this.

Two years ago my husband and I sought a new church home when we relocated. We prayed. We attended a year before joining the congregation. A year later it is hard to imagine being more discouraged and disappointed. Is there a biblical method or insight in choosing a church?

It sounds to me like you followed a biblical method. You looked for a church before you moved, you diligently prayed about it, and you attended for a time before joining. Sadly, it sounds like the church was not all you hoped it was or all you believe a church needs to be. Unfortunately, this is sometimes simply the way it goes. It takes time to learn what a church is all about. It takes time to get to know the people and the pastors. And sometimes what you learn along the way is unsettling. In your case, that may mean it is time to move on.

Before you do so, though, perhaps you should ask these 3 questions: Have you been praying for the people of this church? Have you been serving the people of this church? Have you been with the people of this church? I’d encourage you to ask questions like that because we often want to move on when we feel weary of the people, when we feel like they aren’t interested in us anymore, when relationships feel cool rather than warm, when we feel like we need a fresh start. These questions are designed to help us identify anything we are doing that may contribute to our desire to leave.

If you are convinced that you still need to leave the church, here are some suggestions on searching for a new one:

• The Gospel Coalition maintains a church directory that is open to any church that affirms their Foundation Documents. This at least narrows the search and can provide a few churches to visit and consider.
• The Master’s Seminary maintains a Find a Church page which lists churches founded or pastored by their alumni.
• 9Marks Church Search offers a similar directory for churches that wish to be affiliated with them.

Your recent “Letters to the Editor” contained several letters regarding the Proverbs 31 Woman. As a single young man, this got me wondering, what characteristics should I be looking for in a future wife? What would be an example of a godly woman displaying godly character?

Stick with Proverbs 31. Remember, the whole book of Proverbs is written primarily for an audience of young men. “Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, and forsake not your mother’s teaching, for they are a graceful garland for your head and pendants for your neck” (Proverbs 1:8-9). This kind of instruction begins in chapter 1 and extends all the way to chapter 31. So while the excellent wife of the final chapter is certainly a model for women to aspire to, she is also meant to provide direction for men who are searching for a bride. She exemplifies godly virtue. Learn from her, then search for her.

Every Christian is a minister. According to the book of Romans, every Christian is called upon by God to minister the Word of God to other believers (see Romans 15:14 and the words “able to instruct one another”). But what does that actually look like? How can normal people like you and me fulfill this responsibility? Truthfully, there are as many ways as there are Christians and congregations. Still, let me offer a few common ways you can minister God’s truth to others, even this week as you gather with your church.

First, minister truth in resolving conflict. Because we are sinful people, we will at times behave sinfully toward one another. There will always be some measure of interpersonal conflict within a church, and in Matthew 18 Jesus clearly addresses how such disputes are to be handled. It is interesting and important to note that the elders are not mentioned until the very end of the process. Conflict resolution begins with an individual approaching another individual and showing from the Bible how that person has sinned. If he does not repent, then two church members approach that individual and demonstrate from the Bible how that person has sinned. First alone and then together, they minister truth and trust that this ministry of the Word will confront the person and cause him to repent.

Second, minister truth in mentoring. The Bible calls on us to be intentionally involved in the lives of other people, especially people who are younger than we are. You might think of yourself as a mountain climber who has nearly reached the summit, then looks back to see someone following the trail behind you. You know this trail is dangerous, full of sheer cliffs, unexpected twists, and sudden turns. What that person needs is someone who has already walked the trail to instruct him in navigating it safely. This is why passages like Titus 2 tell us that older men are to be involved in the lives of younger men and older women in the lives of younger women. We are to teach and train them, to minister truth from God’s Word that will help them successfully navigate life.

Third, minister truth in putting sin to death. We enter the Christian life with deep patterns of sin and sinfulness. God calls us to put such sin to death and to come alive to righteousness. This represents a greater challenge than we can face on our own. We need others to help us and we, in turn, need to help others. We help them by ministering the truth to them. So we open the Word to show them what it means to be holy in this area. We open the Word to remind them of the gospel when they’ve stumbled and fallen yet again. We open the Word so we can memorize appropriate passages together. We open the Word to pray its truths for that other person. In all these ways, we minister God’s Word to help another person put an ugly sin to death.

Fourth, minister truth in weaker/stronger disputes. This passage in the book of Romans falls immediately after Paul’s discussion of the weaker/stronger dispute that threatened to undermine the unity and effectiveness of that church. In that first-century context, this was a dispute between people who freely ate meat and people who remained vegetarian in an attempt to maintain the Old Testament laws. In our contemporary context it is unlikely we will encounter this exact situation, but there will still always be issues that threaten to divide us. Like this situation in Rome, it may not be an issue of truth and error, but an issue of weaker and stronger. When we see people struggling with such issues, we need to go to God’s Word and to minister his truth to them in order to foster unity and destroy division.

Fifth, minister truth in intentional spiritual friendships. At Grace Fellowship Church we have recently been emphasizing intentional spiritual friendships. We are intentionally making ourselves available to others to develop meaningful relationships with them, and in one way or another these friendships are bound together by God’s Word. So we have groups of women meeting together to study the Bible, groups of men meeting together to overcome a common sin, groups of men and women meeting together to read books. In its own way, each group is offering the opportunity for church members to minister God’s truth to others. In some way, each group is looking to God’s Word and bringing its truth to bear.

These are just 5 simple ways out of the countless thousands we could number. The simple reality is this: In every part of the life we share together as a church, we have the ability to minister the truth of God’s Word to others. Who in your church needs you to minister the word to them this Sunday?

Today I am kicking off a new “mailbag” feature. A year ago I introduced Letters to the Editor, a means for readers of this site to provide input and feedback. Now I am adding a complementary feature, an opportunity for me to answer questions you have asked. Today’s questions concern Sarah Young and her books, family devotions, family integrated churches, personal devotions, and reading.

Sarah Young and Jesus Calling

Have you ever considered contacting Sarah Young and finding out her perspective on her books personally? The Bible says that no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3). Ask her if Jesus is Lord. In Galatians 6:1 it says if anyone is overtaken in a trespass you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. If you are concerned with God’s Kingdom then for the sake of His kingdom shouldn’t you find out from her mouth personally if she is a heretic and then do a review based on your own personal research.

In a word, no. No to both of your questions: I have never contacted Sarah Young and do not believe I need to find out from her own mouth whether or not she is a heretic. (It should be noted that while I have critiqued her work in the past, I have never called her a heretic.)

I do appreciate your questions and admire your desire to follow biblical principles.The Bible has quite a lot to say about conflict resolution and it is a topic I have written about quite a number of times. Yet we need to apply biblical principles carefully and in ways consistent with the intent of the passages. In general, we find that the passages apply primarily to the local church and to real-world relationships. Matthew 18 and Galatians 6:1 are not speaking to or about an author who has released a book.

When someone releases a work like Jesus Calling or Jesus Always, we already know what that person believes—it’s right there in the book! Young is very clear (or, at least, she was in early editions of Jesus Calling—she scrubbed many of the most concerning claims in later editions) about the nature of her books, that they represent new and direct revelation from Jesus. Nothing I might learn from a conversation with her would change what she has already printed and released to an eager public. My concern when I review her books is not her motives but her actual words.

For more on this topic, I’d point you to D.A. Carson’s editorial on the use and abuse of Matthew 18 in a shrinking world.

Family Devotions

I’m really struggling with trying to start a devotional after dinner with my family. I get nervous about even asking my wife the question of doing it, even though she’s a believer. She’s told me in the past that I am “way too theological” for her, and I think it has scared me from ever trying it again. Any advice?

When I hear that your wife said you are “way too theological” for her, I wonder if you owe her an apology. I wonder if you have looked down on her or expressed disappointment because she doesn’t have as great an interest in theology as you do. It’s possible that she is responding to genuine concerns, genuine sins, genuine hurts. One way forward may be to search your heart to see if this is the case and then ask her forgiveness.

With that said and done, I’d encourage you to begin family devotions anyway. There are few practices that will be of greater benefit to your family than spending time together reading the Bible and praying. It sounds to me like you have become convicted that you ought to begin them. If that’s the case, you need to heed your conscience here.

Let me offer just a couple of quick tips.

First, family devotions is not first about theology but about relationship—a family spending time together with God. I’ll assume you have a personal relationship with God—you read and pray privately. I’ll assume the same is true of your wife and older children. Family devotions is now a time for your family to join together in relationship with God. The purpose is not theology but relationship—relating to God by hearing from him and speaking to him together.

Second, begin simple and small. It’s easy to think you need to do something deep and complicated, that for the time to be meaningful it needs to be a half hour of catechisms and lengthy prayers. Start small. Read a few verses, comment on them or ask a couple of questions, then pray for a couple of minutes. As you build the habit you can adapt, you can lengthen them, you can make them more complicated. But you’ll have the best success building the habit if you keep it simple. We’ve been following Big Beliefs! by David Helm and have found it just right.

It’s impossible for me to imagine a scenario in which you would regret beginning the habit of reading the Bible and praying with your family. It’s easy for me to imagine a scenario in which you’d allow fear or pride to keep them from the blessing. You know what to do! (More on the topic: Why We Fail at Family Devotions and How We Do Family Devotions.)

Divided and Family Integrated Church

I greatly respect your honest evaluation of the bias Divided clearly portrays. While you point out the flaws in the integrity of the “documentary,” you also acknowledge the problem: young people leaving the church in droves. And you identify a less biased reason than Family Integrated Church, namely lack of gospel and hypocrisy. My question then: Is there a balance for a pastor (like myself) who agrees that family-centered study, worship and service are ideal without making the error of FIC and creating division? What is the solution if prioritizing the family unit isn’t?

First, a definition: A family integrated church is one in which parents and children always (or almost always) remain together for services and other activities. Said otherwise, it does not offer nurseries, activities, or programs in which people are separated by age. Family integrated churches tend to be aligned with NCFIC, the National Center for Family Integrated Churches. This organization was responsible for the film Divided and the heroes of the film were the organization’s spokesmen.

I am convinced that family integration reads too much into minor passages and, on that basis, makes a rule where no rule exists. Rather, in the absence of clear teaching, we have freedom to choose based on wisdom and preference. Problems and division arise when family integrated proponents suggest their reading is the only appropriate and obedient one. Further division comes in the way they define the terms—they use integration to speak of what they do and segregation to describe the common alternative—so where we might say our church has age-appropriate programs they tend to say we have age-segregated programs. That’s a way to win a discussion before it’s even begun!

When it comes to young people leaving the church, the solution will certainly not be based on a misinterpretation of Scripture. Yes, we need to prioritize the family unit, but I am not at all convinced that family integration is key. Rather, we need to teach our children rather than entertain them. In families and local church communities we need to instruct our children in the Bible and in Christian doctrine. For too long our youth programs have been focused on entertainment, on trying to make Jesus easy and cool. We haven’t trusted our children to have a genuine interest in spiritual matters and haven’t cared enough to deliver compelling answers to their big questions. Yet, from all I’ve experienced, witnessed, and learned, children do better when we treat them with dignity and instruct them well. They aren’t impressed when we set the bar low; they rise to the challenge when we set the bar high.

At Grace Fellowship Church we offer childcare programs up to age 5 during our morning worship service. When children are 6 they begin to worship with the adults. On Sunday evenings we begin our service together. Then the children leave for age-appropriate programs while the teens and adults pray. The youth meet together on Wednesday night for two hours of fun activities (yes, we still do fun!) and meaty teaching. We consider this a fair balance between teaching children the importance of corporate worship while still allowing much of the teaching to be at their level. (See Jacob Reaume and GotQuestions for good responses to family integration.)

Personal Devotions

What do your personal devotions look like? Could you provide some detail to your current “plan,” or the plan that you have most benefitted from? What do you do in terms of Bible reading, meditation, memorization, prayer, etc. Do you use a reading plan? If so, which has been most helpful? Do you use devotional literature? If so, which would you recommend?

Personal devotions have never come particularly easy to me and I don’t consider myself a model of doing them well. Yet I believe strongly in their importance and remain committed to them even while longing for a greater measure of that Piper-like passion for the Word.

My devotions are simple: I read the Bible and I pray. When and how I do this can vary a fair bit depending on circumstances—day of the week, early-morning meetings, travel, and so on. I also switch it up from time to time to keep things fresh. But when I am at home and in my best routine, it tends to go something like this: I get up early and spend a few minutes drinking a cup of coffee and getting the daily A La Carte article launched. By then I’m fully awake. I go for a half-hour walk and spend that time praying, with the PrayerMate app guiding me through a very conversational kind of prayer. When I get home I read 4 or 5 chapters of the Bible (using the Logos app on my iPad), following a 5-day-per-week plan that goes through the Bible in the year. I read this at a pretty good pace—it’s a plan meant to give an overall picture of the Bible more than to dive deep into any one part of it. Then it is time to get the kids up and do our family devotions.

That is my general pattern, but I keep it flexible. If I have an early-morning prayer meeting, I may count that as my daily prayer. If I have an early-morning meeting that involves driving, I may listen to that day’s reading in the car. I sometimes miss a day and the 5-day plan allows me to use Saturday as a catch-up day. But if I’ve kept up with my readings on Monday to Friday and have no reading on Saturday, I’ll read whatever I want. On Sundays I may read the sermon text or I may not read at all. Often I spend time later in the day studying a passage as part of my writing.

Reading

Hey Tim, have you ever written an article on how to make time to read? I would love to read more myself and was just wondering what you do to make the time to read as many books as you do.

I have, in fact. Here are 10 Tips to Read More and Read Better and 7 Ways to Read a Book. If I were to update my tips today, I’d add this: Read on a plan. I built the 2017 Christian Reading Challenge with this in mind. Sometimes we do best when we are reading with a purpose, reading to fulfill a challenge.

If you would like to ask me a question, you can do so right here.

I once had an unexpected, startling confrontation with another Christian. I was a speaker at a conference and walking from one event to another when an individual came charging up to me. He got right up in my face, like a batter arguing strikes with an umpire, and began to tell how I had offended him. I quickly learned I had done something he found irritating and he wanted me to know all about it.

I listened to him for a while and then asked permission to ask him a question. It was a simple one: “Have I sinned against you?” I explained my rationale. “If I have sinned against you, please tell me how because I want to apologize for that and to seek your forgiveness.” His response was, “No, you haven’t sinned against me.” Then he jumped right back into his tirade and talked on until a friend stepped between us, explaining that I had another event to get to.

On the one hand I found this startling. It isn’t often that people confront me in that manner and with that kind of aggression. On the other hand, it didn’t surprise me that he was confronting me without identifying any clear way in which I had actually sinned against him. I quickly saw that he was not carrying out biblical conflict resolution but rather blowing off some steam. (If you’re wondering, I had done a presentation a few minutes earlier and had read scripture passages from my notes instead of directly from the Bible. This is what had so offended him.)

As a leader within a local church I’ve had many opportunities to guide people as they grapple with confrontation and I have observed that a lot of what we want to confront in other people is not sin but annoyance. Often our purpose in confronting people is not to deal with fallout from sin, but to air grievances. We want to give vent to our annoyances and then just walk away. Yet the Bible doesn’t give us permission to confront people unless we can identify the ways in which they have actually sinned against us.

Confrontation is good and necessary where there has been sinful offense. God tells us to confront sin because offense causes alienation, it causes relationships to grow distant or even be severed. Satan loves to use this lack of unity to undermine God’s work. Disunity is dangerous. The purpose of biblical confrontation is to bring about reconciliation, to bring peace between two parties. The reason I asked this gentleman whether or not I had sinned against him was to identify whether the onus lay on me to pursue reconciliation. Romans 12:18 says, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” and I want to obey that mandate. It was clarifying to hear him say that I had not sinned against him. It proved that he was not confronting sin in a biblical way and not pursuing reconciliation. He was just blowing off steam.

When people in my church ask whether or how they should confront sin, the very first question I always ask is this: “What biblical language can you use to describe that sin?” I want them to ensure they have actually been sinned against and have not merely become aggravated or irritated by another person’s behavior. Not surprisingly, we quickly learn that many people are not interested in biblically confronting sin but in venting annoyance. We’re a grumpy bunch! If and when they can describe the offense in biblical language, the second question is, “Can you overlook this in love?” Unless that sin is going to cause a permanent rift in a relationship or unless it is likely to repeat and harm others, it may be a sin that can be overlooked. Then, and only then, do we begin to speak about confronting the person in the way Jesus lays out in Matthew 18.

And to those who have been confronted, I offer this counsel: “Always be willing and eager to offer an apology, to repent of offensive behavior. But, as far as possible, know what it is you are apologizing for.” A vague apology for a vague offense is really no apology at all. It stands little chance of bringing reconciliation. Yet, that said, sometimes an apology, even in vague circumstances, is a way to love others, to model humility, and to preserve peace. Humility always rules.

God is good to instruct us in conflict resolution. We need the instruction and the church needs the peace it brings. But unless an offense can be described in biblical terminology, it is probably not a sin at all. As much as possible, know your Bible so that over time you will begin to speak in the language of the Bible and with the voice of the God of the Bible. This will preserve your relationships, this will protect God’s church.

One matter of continual concern to me is interpersonal conflict within the church. It’s not the existence or even the quantity of conflict, but the inability or unwillingness to deal with it when it arises, and this despite the Bible’s clear teaching that Christians are to resolve conflict and how Christians are to resolve conflict. It’s simple: As believers we are not permitted by God to have open, unaddressed quarrels with other believers. We are to work to bring any and every interpersonal conflict to appropriate resolution.

Yet our churches have too many people who are willing to grumble and complain about one another, who allow disputes to go unresolved, who allow petty quarrels to fester and to threaten to grow into full-out battles. Today I offer this brief piece on how to identify conflict within local church relationships and how to bring them to healthy resolution. It involves just two questions: What kind of conflict are we in? And what do we need to do to resolve this kind of conflict?

What Kind of Conflict Are We In?

Before you can resolve any conflict, you need to understand its nature. Broadly speaking, you will encounter three different kinds of interpersonal conflict in your local church relationships. I’ve been helped here by Lou Priolo who in turn draws from Wayne Mack.

• Conflicts of differentness arise between people who disagree on matters of preference, especially when it comes to ministry. Here we think of Paul and Barnabas and their conflict over whether to bring John Mark on their missionary journey (see Acts 15:39). Both wanted to do what was best for the sake of ministry but right there a sharp disagreement arose. They saw the situation differently and were unable to bring it to healthy resolution.
• Conflicts of righteousness arise when people have different understandings of how Christians are to interpret God’s guidance in matters of conscience. In the first century, Paul addressed Christians eating meat that had been sacrificed to idols (Romans 14). Contemporary examples might include Christians using birth control, abstaining from alcohol, or enrolling their children in public schools.
• Conflicts of sinfulness arise when one person commits sin against another. Biblical examples abound and, undoubtedly, each of us can think of many examples from our own lives, families, and churches.

Most, if not all, conflicts will fit into one of these three categories. The way to resolve a conflict depends on its nature and this is why we must give thought and prayer to discerning what kind of conflict it is. Once we have made that determination, we are ready to work toward resolution. We are ready to ask, What do we need to do to resolve this kind of conflict?

Resolving Conflicts of Differentness

While we may resist differentness in our churches, it can actually be a sign of God’s blessing. After all, God means to call us into countercultural communities that include representatives of all kinds of backgrounds, cultures, races, and socio-economic groups. The very differences that give opportunity for believers to grow in love, unity, and Christlikeness also represent an opportunity for Satan to incite conflict.

Generally, such conflicts are not resolved through a formal process of confrontation, but through growth in Christian character and deliberate expression of that character. If you find yourself in a conflict of differentness, learn to listen, learn to appreciate rather than fear or resent the differences in other believers. Find ways to express the Christian virtues of kindness, love, and patience. Guard yourself against making rash and unfair judgments about another person’s motives or maturity. Do what you can to care more for the other person than for defending your own views. And if you realize that you have sinned against another person along the way, humbly seek their forgiveness (See “Resolving Conflicts of Sinfulness” below).

Resolving Conflicts of Righteousness

God calls his people to himself but does not make us clones. He does not make us utterly uniform in all we believe when it comes to understanding and applying his Word. This is especially true when it comes to matters of conscience such as the number of children we have, whether we have liberty to enjoy alcohol, or whether we must set aside Sunday as the sabbath. We cannot be without convictions in these areas, but we soon realize that our convictions may differ from those of other people in our local church.

Once more, conflicts of this nature are not resolved by a formal process of confrontation. They, too, are addressed through Christian character. In Romans 14, Paul uses the language of “weak” and “strong” and warns of the unique temptations that will threaten to divide Christians. The temptation of the strong will be to despise the weak while the temptation of the weak will be to condemn the strong. The strong may see the weak as ensnared by legalism and immaturity and this will lead to hatred and mockery. The weak will see the strong as licentious and will condemn them for lawless behavior. Both will distance themselves from the other. Paul’s solution is two-fold: Welcome one another and refuse to pass judgment.

When you find yourself in a conflict of righteousness, understand that healthy resolution involves self-confrontation, not confrontation of the other person. (Lou Priolo says, “If anything, some form of self-confrontation may be in order to bring about repentance for any selfish thoughts, motives, and attitudes (if not words and actions) that have been brought to light by the differentness conflict.”) Deliberately seek out the people who differ from you, get to know them, and learn to express love to them. Do your best to understand how they have arrived at their convictions. Be aware of your temptation to divide from people who differ from you (and group together with people who agree with you) and utterly refuse to judge others as godly or ungodly, mature or immature, worthy or unworthy, on the basis of similarity or difference.

Resolving Conflicts of Sinfulness

And then there are the conflicts of sinfulness in which one Christian has sinned against the other. In many cases, the best course of action is to overlook the offense in love (1 Peter 4:8, Proverbs 10:12). This is not pretending that it never happened, but identifying it as a minor matter that does not need to confronted.

The second option is to confront the sinner, and this is advisable or even necessary if the sin is too hurtful, habitual, or significant to overlook. The purpose of such confrontation is to bring reconciliation and it involves a process that begins informally but may end with the gravest formality. Jesus lays it out in Matthew 18.

Step 1. Speak to the person who sinned against you. “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother” (15). Approach that person in a spirit of gentleness and humility, explain how he sinned, and allow him to express repentance. Be sure to ask clarifying questions instead of relying on bold accusations. Be willing to believe that perhaps he did not sin at all and that you simply misunderstood the situation. In most cases, forgiveness is sought and extended and the issue goes no further.

Let me add two pieces of counsel here. For church leaders: Some of the most common phrases pastors should utter is, “Have you spoken to him about this?” or “Have you confronted her for what she said?” Leaders can be too quick to short-circuit this Christian-to-Christian process. For church members: There is a fine balance between confronting too often and too rarely. Immaturity or fear of man may keep us from confronting sinners and pursuing reconciliation. Many relationships remain broken simply because no one had the courage to confront. On the other hand, immaturity and pride can compel us to address even the smallest issues. There is a balance that can be attained by seeking counsel from wiser, more seasoned believers. But all the while, know that it is your responsibility to maintain discretion and, initially at least, to protect the reputation of the other person. The best outcome is when the matter is known only to you and the other person.

Step 2. If the person does not express remorse or ask forgiveness after your confrontation, you are bound to follow the second step: “But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses” (16). Appeal to one or two mature believers in the church, explain the situation, and let them affirm that you have taken the right approach to this point. Be willing to hear that the other person did not sin or that you misunderstood the situation. But if they affirm your actions, take them with you as you approach the person a second time. As you confront that person, make it clear that you are following the steps laid out in Matthew 18. Once again, the hope and expectation is that the person will seek forgiveness and the matter will be closed. If the person remains unrepentant even now, then it becomes a matter for the church membership and leadership. You may still be involved, but the main responsibility passes out of your hands.

Conclusion

Conflict between believers is a sad, inevitable reality. If even Paul (the great Apostle) and Barnabas (the son of encouragement) had a sharp disagreement, what is the likelihood that we will live out our Christian lives unscathed? Yet conflict is an opportunity to grow in grace, in character, in love, in humility. It all begins with two simple questions: What kind of conflict are we in? And what do we need to do to resolve that kind of conflict?

Note: Lou Priolo’s Resolving Conflict is an excellent book that I’ve drawn from substantially (as well as from his previous writings that formed the basis of this work).

I’m Still a Complementarian… And There’s Still That “But”

I’m glad to read people’s struggles to better understand, define, and appreciate complementarianism. This kind of discussion should prove fruitful!

How We Pray

There are lots of points made in this survey on prayer, but perhaps this is the most important: “Reid said the most striking result was the evidence that prayer habits often carry through from childhood. The survey showed that if people prayed as children, they were overwhelmingly more inclined to pray as adults, and the opposite was also true.”

9 Perspectives on Trump, Clinton, and the Evangelical Christian Voter

Just like the headline says…

Unsolicited Advice for My Three Sons

Two caveats: This is not written by a Christian and you won’t agree with all of it. But still, there is some good stuff here.

Say Hard Things

“When was the last time someone told you you were wrong? If you can’t remember, you may have reason to be concerned. Sometimes the most loving thing someone can do for us is point out an error or inconsistency in the way we think or live.”

This Day in 1619. 397 years ago today, the six-month long Synod of Dort ended, having confirmed the authority of the “Heidelberg Catechism.” *

The Day We Discovered Our Parents Were Russian Spies

“For years Donald Heathfield, Tracey Foley and their two children lived the American dream. Then an FBI raid revealed the truth: they were agents of Putin’s Russia. Their sons tell their story.”

The Feed Is Dying

“The feed is dying. The reverse-chronological social media feed — the way you’ve read Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and blogs (which is to say, the internet) at various points over the last decade, updates organized according to the time they were posted, refreshed at the top of the screen — no longer really makes sense.”

Flashback: Matthew 18 in a Shrinking World

From a few years ago, but still timely: “The Internet has made the Christian world much smaller, allowing more Christians to have a voice that extends across the globe. And with this new ability to communicate comes new questions about how we are to deal with conflict, how we are to deal with questions and concerns.”

Racism is nothing more than collective narcissism: I love my group above all others because I love myself.

—Michael Horton

Christians have had their share of social media successes in over the past few years, many of them related to identifying theological error and defending theological truth. This work has been carried on through blogs, of course, but also through Facebook and YouTube and other forms of digital communication. But for all of the success, there have also been a lot of failures. Many of the most egregious failures have been in discussing or debating controversial topics. As we learn to engage controversy using these new platforms, we do well to consider how to we can speak with equal parts truth and love—love that is strengthened by truth and truth that is softened by love.

Robert R. Booth’s Children of the Promise, a book on the always-controversial subject of baptism, offers the kind of challenge we need. He says

We know we understand an opposing view only when we are able to articulate it and receive the affirmation of our opponent that we have accurately represented his position. Only then can we proceed to argue against it. It does not take a big man to push over a straw man—little men are up to this simple task. Nor is it enough to say that our brother is wrong, or silly, or that his arguments make no sense; we must be prepared to demonstrate such claims. Some argue that they do not need to demonstrate such claims. Some argue they do not need to understand opposing views. But they cannot expect to engage people who disagree with them.

This applies to discussions far beyond baptism. Tony Payne once turned to football (soccer) to provide the helpful illustration of playing the ball rather than the man.

As in football, so in debates and arguments, we should strive to play the ball not the man; to discuss the issue itself rather than attack the person presenting the issue. This is not easy. It requires the ability to separate the pros and cons of a particular argument or issue from the personality who is presenting them, and to subject your own arguments to the same honest scrutiny that you bring to bear on the alternative view.

You know you’re dealing with someone who is playing the man not the ball when he makes a straw man of your view; that is, when he presents your side of things in an extreme or ugly light, or describes or illustrates it in such a way as to make it unattractive. By contrast, a ball-player endeavours to describe and present the opposing view as fairly and reasonably as he would like someone to present his own view.

Ball-players also freely and honestly acknowledge what is good and right in the opposing view, and avoid intemperately damning the whole because of a defect in the parts. They seek to stick to the issue at hand, and not broaden or generalize the disagreement into a questioning of character or bona fides.

Playing the ball also means seeking to remain in good relationship with the person you’re disagreeing with, so that you can hopefully shake hands and share a coffee after your debate, or continue to work together on other projects or platforms. This is the ideal, and we should strive for it—to avoid targetting the person, and to deal instead with the issue, in the hope of coming to a common mind.

A very helpful and extensive word on gospel polemics comes from Tim Keller’s Center Church, and in the rest of this article I distill his wisdom to seven rules that ought to guide our hearts, our minds, and our words as we have these difficult discussions.

1. Carson’s Rule

The first rule comes from D.A. Carson and states You don’t have to follow Matthew 18 before publishing polemics. “[I]f someone is publicly presenting theological views that are opposed to sound doctrine, and you are not in the same ecclesiastical body with this person (that is, there is no body of elders over you both, as when, for example, both of you are ministers in the same denomination), then you may indeed publicly oppose those without going privately to the author of them.” This responds immediately to a common but misguided charge: But have you approached him personally? A person who publishes his words publicly can be responded to publicly.

2. Murray’s Rule

The second rule comes from John Murray and states You must take full responsibility for even unwitting misrepresentation of someone’s views. “In our internet age we are very quick to dash off a response because we think Mr A promotes X. And when someone points out that Mr A didn’t mean X because over here he said Y, we simply apologize, or maybe we don’t even do that. John Murray’s principle means that polemics must never be ‘dashed off.’ Great care should be taken to be sure you really know what Mr A believes and promotes before you publish.” To rule #2 I might add that if you have a relationship with a person with whom you disagree, it may be wise to attempt to contact that person to ensure that you have, indeed, understood their position and are now able to accurately represent it. More importantly, though, is to ensure you are being as accurate as possible in all you say.

3. Alexander’s Rule

The third rule comes from Archibald Alexander and states Never attribute an opinion to your opponent that he himself does not own. “[E]ven if you believe that Mr A’s belief X could or will lead others who hold that position to belief Y, do not accuse Mr A of holding to belief Y himself, if he disowns it. You may consider him inconsistent, but it is one thing to say that and another thing to tar him with belief Y by implying or insisting that he actually holds it when he does not. A similar move happens when you imply or argue that, if Mr A quotes a particular author favorably at any point, then Mr A must hold to all the views that the author holds at other points. If you, through guilt-by-association, hint or insist that Mr A must hold other beliefs of that particular author, then you are violating Alexander’s Rule and, indeed, Murray’s Rule. You are misrepresenting your opponent.” Be fair and be accurate. You can point out what you see as an inconsistency and you can even point out that the author seems to be influenced by authors you consider dangerous. But do not conflate the two.

4. Gillespie’s Rule A

The fourth rule is from George Gillespie and states Take your opponents’ views in total, not selectively. “Just because someone says (or fails to say something) in one setting—either for good reasons or because of a misstep—does not mean he fails to say it repeatedly and emphatically in the rest of his work. Gillespie is saying, ‘Be sure that what you say is Mr X’s position really is his settled view. You can’t infer that from one instance.’ If we build a case on such instances, we are in danger of falling afoul of Murray’s rule as well. We must take responsibility for misrepresenting the views of others.”

5. Gillespie’s Rule B

The fifth rule also belongs to Gillespie and states Represent and engage your opponents’ position in its very strongest form, not in a weak ‘straw man’ form. “Do all the work necessary until you can articulate the views of your opponent with such strength that he says, ‘I couldn’t have said it better myself.’ Then and only then will your polemics not misrepresent him, take his views in toto, and actually have the possibility of being persuasive.” I think we come to appreciate the importance of this rule when we see another person unfairly caricature our own beliefs. Never allow your opponent to say, “He completely misunderstood me.”

6. Calvin’s Rule

The sixth rule is Calvin’s and states Seek to persuade, not antagonize, but watch your motives! “It is possible to seek to be winsome and persuasive out of a self-centeredness, rather than a God-centeredness. We may do it to be popular. On the other hand, it is just as possible to be bold and strongly polemical out of self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness. And therefore, looking very closely at our motives, we should be sure our polemics do not unnecessarily harden and antagonize our opponents. We should seek to win them, as Paul did Peter, not to be rid of them.” The goal is not to vanquish an opponent or the people who have been led astray by him, but to win them all to the truth.

7. Everybody’s Rule

The seventh and final rule belongs to each of the previous six theologians and states Only God sees the heart—so remember the gospel and stick to criticizing the theology. Keller goes to John Newton and says “no one has written more eloquently about this rule than John Newton, in his well-known ‘Letter on Controversy.’ Newton says that first, before you begin to write a single word against an opponent, ‘and during the whole time you are preparing your answer, you may commend him by earnest prayer to the Lord’s teaching and blessing.’ This practice will stir up love for him and ‘such a disposition will have a good influence upon every page you write.’ Later in the letter Newton says, ‘Be upon your guard against admitting anything personal into the debate. If you think you have been ill treated, you will have an opportunity of showing that you are a disciple of Jesus, who ‘when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not.’ ‘It is a great danger to aim to ‘gain the laugh on your side,’ to make your opponent look evil and ridiculous instead of engaging their views with ‘the compassion due to the souls of men.’”

I commend these seven rules to my fellow bloggers and to all of us who engage in online discussion. I share them today out of the conviction that I need to do far better in each of these ways, that I need to keep these rules before me. May we, may I, exemplify God-glorifying polemics.

Image credit: Shutterstock

Greatness awaits. Two men don their armor and swing their weapons, a giant battle axe against two short swords. The axe falls and the battle is over. Two men race their sports cars through the countryside, mountains rising up on both sides as they jockey for position. One car aggressively bumps the other so it hits the guard rail and overturns in a shower of sparks. Greatness awaits. Two men lead their futuristic armies as they wage a bloody war to defend or overthrow a city. They march bravely through the noise, the confusion, the blood. Greatness awaits.

Greatness awaits. Greatness is there for the taking, if only you’ll reach out and take hold of it. This is the promise of Sony’s campaign for the new PlayStation 4 gaming console. It is the theme of their marketing, the challenge of a commercial that has been viewed on YouTube almost 12 million times and many more times in other media. The commercial and campaign have been received with great enthusiasm. Men get it. They want it. They respond to it.

Greatness

We hear a lot of complaints today about men and their video games. We know now that the average gamer is not a thirteen-year-old boy burning up those hours between getting home from school and eating dinner with his family (though certainly teenage boys do love their games). There has been a massive demographic shift so that today the average gamer is a man in his twenties or thirties who owns a $1,000 widescreen television, plugs in his $400 console, loads it up with $70 games, and regards gaming as his hobby.

I have often wondered why it is that men are so drawn to video games. What is it in the male consciousness that responds to these games and keeps going back for more? I think Sony may have captured it in this brilliant campaign: Greatness awaits.

Most of us live very ordinary lives, lives that are consumed with far more drudgery than excitement. Even the most interesting jobs involve endless amounts of maintenance and paperwork. We know we are doing the right thing, the good thing, when we go to the office and put in our hours and have a salary deposited into our bank accounts every couple of weeks. It is the right thing to do, but it’s all so humdrum.

Video games offer the action and adrenaline missing from our lives. But even more significantly, video games offer the allure of accomplishment, the allure of greatness. We don’t play games to lose, but to win. We don’t play to be the vanquished but the vanquisher. We play to triumph, to conquer, to overthrow and overcome, to do the things that are so far outside our experience of life. Our nerves grow taut, our palms sweat, our hearts beat faster. In a column at Family Studies, Amber Lapp says games offer “an ‘escape’—as one 23-year-old unmarried father put it—from the duties and drudgeries of reality.”

I get it. I feel it. Like so many men, I am drawn to video games. I could easily spend endless hours playing them. I have had to discipline myself into avoiding them in most circumstances simply because they can draw me in and keep from prioritizing what is more important. I see and want that promise of greatness.

Greatness Together

But there is more to games today than greatness. There is greatness together. As the men in this commercial battle one another with swords, with cars, with guns, they sing Lou Reed’s classic “Perfect Day.”

Oh, it’s such a perfect day
I’m glad I spent it with you
Oh, such a perfect day
You just keep me hanging on

This is their perfect day, battling with ancient weapons, driving at breakneck speeds, fighting future wars, and doing it all together. As video games have matured, they have added a multiplayer, community component. Even as gamers spend more and more time in front of their televisions and computers, they increasingly spend it linked together. Where gaming used to be man against machine, now it’s men against machines.

Games offer the allure of accomplishment and greatness, and now they offer it in community and friendship. Men can battle against one another competitively or they can battle together as a team. Greatness awaits us together.

True Greatness

I am one day behind in my Bible-reading plan (or Bible-listening plan, as it happens). My plan tells me I should be in Matthew 19 today, but instead I found myself in Matthew 18. It turned out to be one of those happy little providences because it meant that I heard these words as I drove to work in the cold, pre-dawn darkness:

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

God measures greatness very differently than we do. We measure greatness in what we accomplish and who we vanquish and where we do battle. We value greatness in the things others can see, in the medals awarded, the accolades offered.

But God associates the truest and deepest greatness with the things others may not see at all. We believe greatness comes when we elevate ourselves, but Jesus says greatness comes when we lower ourselves. “Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 14:11). Leon Morris says it well:

The kingdom of heaven is not like earthly kingdoms. In earthly kingdoms military might or earthly wealth is what counts. It is the ability to overthrow others or outsmart them or to outbid them that matters. The person who asserts himself is the one who gets on. But Jesus’ kingdom is quite different. Paradoxically it is the person who is like the little child who is the greatest. Being in the kingdom does not mean entering a competition for the supreme place, but engaging in lowly service. True greatness consists not in receiving service but in giving it. The genuinely humble person is the one that really counts in that kingdom. The humble person is the greatest.

Sony promises that greatness awaits us in their games. But Jesus promises a much better greatness. This greatness comes in being a godly husband or an attentive father or a faithful friend or a humble servant. It comes not by going high, but by going low.

It may not feel like greatness to cuddle up with your daughter and read her that bedtime story. It may not feel like triumph to pray with her or sing to her before she goes to sleep. But this is the stuff of true greatness. Ask her and she will assure you it is true.

It may not make every nerve taut with anticipation and excitement when you turn off the games and spend the evening talking with your wife, listening to her, reading God’s Word with her, praying with her and for her. But this is the stuff of true greatness.

There is no reward, no medal or badge or accolade, in serving the people of your church by putting out the chairs or cleaning up the post-potluck mess. There is no hero’s parade at the end of it. But this is the essence of true greatness. And this is the greatness our games can never deliver. To the contrary, this is the very greatness our games may cause us to miss altogether.

We want to escape the doldrums of life so we can experience greatness. But Jesus calls on us to define greatness in his way. Greatness awaits, but it is waiting right there in the mundane, in the ordinary moments, in real life. Don’t miss the real thing!

The blogosphere in general and the Christian blogosphere in particular has had its share of successes, but also its share of failures. Many of its most egregious and public failures have been in the realm of polemics—discussing or debating controversial topics. Many bloggers have mastered all the practical rules of blogging, the short paragraphs, the use of subheadings, the best times and dates to post their articles. But these same bloggers, myself included, would do well to work toward mastering the spiritual rules of blogging.

I recently found help in an unusual place, Robert R. Booth’s Children of the Promise, a book on the always-controversial subject of baptism. He says

We know we understand an opposing view only when we are able to articulate it and receive the affirmation of our opponent that we have accurately represented his position. Only then can we proceed to argue against it. It does not take a big man to push over a straw man—little men are up to this simple task. Nor is it enough to say that our brother is wrong, or silly, or that his arguments make no sense; we must be prepared to demonstrate such claims. Some argue that they do not need to demonstrate such claims. Some argue they do not need to understand opposing views. But they cannot expect to engage people who disagree with them.

Indeed, and this applies to discussions far beyond baptism. In a recent article Tony Payne turns to football (soccer) to provide the helpful illustration of playing the ball rather than the man. “As in football, so in debates and arguments, we should strive to play the ball not the man; to discuss the issue itself rather than attack the person presenting the issue. This is not easy. It requires the ability to separate the pros and cons of a particular argument or issue from the personality who is presenting them, and to subject your own arguments to the same honest scrutiny that you bring to bear on the alternative view.”

You know you’re dealing with someone who is playing the man not the ball when he makes a straw man of your view; that is, when he presents your side of things in an extreme or ugly light, or describes or illustrates it in such a way as to make it unattractive. By contrast, a ball-player endeavours to describe and present the opposing view as fairly and reasonably as he would like someone to present his own view.

Ball-players also freely and honestly acknowledge what is good and right in the opposing view, and avoid intemperately damning the whole because of a defect in the parts. They seek to stick to the issue at hand, and not broaden or generalize the disagreement into a questioning of character or bona fides.

Playing the ball also means seeking to remain in good relationship with the person you’re disagreeing with, so that you can hopefully shake hands and share a coffee after your debate, or continue to work together on other projects or platforms. This is the ideal, and we should strive for it—to avoid targetting the person, and to deal instead with the issue, in the hope of coming to a common mind.

A very helpful and extensive word on gospel polemics comes from Tim Keller. It bears regular and repeated readings. Keller looks to D.A. Carson and several other theologians and arrives at seven rules that should guide our discussions, our polemics, our controveries, our words.

#1. Carson’s Rule

The first rule comes from D.A. Carson and states You don’t have to follow Matthew 18 before publishing polemics. “[I]f someone is publicly presenting theological views that are opposed to sound doctrine, and you are not in the same ecclesiastical body with this person (that is, there is no body of elders over you both, as when, for example, both of you are ministers in the same denomination,) then you may indeed publicly oppose those without going privately to the author of them. Carson does add a qualifier, but that comes under the next rule.”

#2. Murray’s Rule

The second rule comes from John Murray and states You must take full responsibility for even unwitting misrepresentation of someone’s views. “In our internet age we are very quick to dash off a response because we think Mr A promotes X. And when someone points out that Mr A didn’t mean X because over here he said Y, we simply apologize, or maybe we don’t even do that. John Murray’s principle means that polemics must never be ‘dashed off.’ Great care should be taken to be sure you really know what Mr A believes and promotes before you publish.” To rule #2 I might add that if you have a relationship with a person with whom you disagree, it may be wise to attempt to contact that person to ensure that you have, indeed, understood their position and are now able to accurately represent it.

#3. Alexander’s Rule

The third rule comes from Archibald Alexander and states Never attribute an opinion to your opponent that he himself does not own. “[E]ven if you believe that Mr A’s belief X could or will lead others who hold that position to belief Y, do not accuse Mr A of holding to belief Y himself, if he disowns it. You may consider him inconsistent, but it is one thing to say that and another thing to tar him with belief Y by implying or insisting that he actually holds it when he does not. A similar move happens when you imply or argue that, if Mr A quotes a particular author favorably at any point, then Mr A must hold to all the views that the author holds at other points. If you, through guilt-by-association, hint or insist that Mr A must hold other beliefs of that particular author, then you are violating Alexander’s Rule and, indeed, Murray’s Rule. You are misrepresenting your opponent.”

#4. Gillespie’s Rule A

The fourth rule is from George Gillespie and states Take your opponents’ views in total, not selectively. “Just because someone says (or fails to say something) in one setting—either for good reasons or because of a misstep—does not mean he fails to say it repeatedly and emphatically in the rest of his work. Gillespie is saying, ‘Be sure that what you say is Mr X’s position really is his settled view. You can’t infer that from one instance.’ If we build a case on such instances, we are in danger of falling afoul of Murray’s rule as well. We must take responsibility for misrepresenting the views of others.”

#5. Gillespie’s Rule B

The fifth rule also belongs to Gillespie and states Represent and engage your opponents’ position in its very strongest form, not in a weak ‘straw man’ form. “Do all the work necessary until you can articulate the views of your opponent with such strength that he says, ‘I couldn’t have said it better myself.’ Then and only then will your polemics not misrepresent him, take his views in toto, and actually have the possibility of being persuasive.”

#6. Calvin’s Rule

The sixth rule is Calvin’s and states Seek to persuade, not antagonize, but watch your motives! “It is possible to seek to be winsome and persuasive out of a self-centeredness, rather than a God-centeredness. We may do it to be popular. On the other hand, it is just as possible to be bold and strongly polemical out of self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness. And therefore, looking very closely at our motives, we should be sure our polemics do not unnecessarily harden and antagonize our opponents. We should seek to win them, as Paul did Peter, not to be rid of them.”

#7. Everybody’s Rule

The seventh and final rule belongs to each of the previous six theologians and states Only God sees the heart—so remember the gospel and stick to criticizing the theology. Keller goes to John Newton and says “no one has written more eloquently about this rule than John Newton, in his well-known ‘Letter on Controversy.’ Newton says that first, before you begin to write a single word against an opponent, ‘and during the whole time you are preparing your answer, you may commend him by earnest prayer to the Lord’s teaching and blessing.’ This practice will stir up love for him and ‘such a disposition will have a good influence upon every page you write.’ Later in the letter Newton says, ‘Be upon your guard against admitting anything personal into the debate. If you think you have been ill treated, you will have an opportunity of showing that you are a disciple of Jesus, who ‘when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not.’ ‘It is a great danger to aim to ‘gain the laugh on your side,’ to make your opponent look evil and ridiculous instead of engaging their views with ‘the compassion due to the souls of men.'”

I commend these seven rules to my fellow bloggers and to all of us who engage in online discussion. May we exemplify gospel-centered and God-glorifying polemics.