A few months ago I had a prayer request for my wife. It was thought that she had a condition whereas she would be required to undergo a C-section to birth our child. At our doctor's appointment Wednesday we found out that everything had moved to where it needed to be. Looks like the bed rest helped and that we are experiencing God's great hand of mercy! We are thankful that the Lord has heard our prayers and that He has chosen to glorify Himself through a natural childbirth. We truly get far better than we deserve!

I think my fellow bloggers have taken off early for the Christmas season. Today is another slow day.

John Piper reminds us that today is the 200th anniversary of John Newton's death. If you want to read Piper's biography on Newton you can do so here, or you can buy Josiah Bull's excellent work The Life of John Newton, or if you are feeling really saucy you can buy his Complete Works for only $127. You can read his letters for free at Grace Gems and his Olney Hymns for free at CCEL. Ever minute and every dollar you spend getting to know this man of God is well spent.

Old Truth sounds like John Piper today: Worship, Not Evangelism, The Most Important Task. Piper says that Missions exists because worship does not. This article echoes that sentiment as it points us to a quote from Robert Reymond's New Systematic Theology. His central thesis is this: For decades now evangelical churches have been conducting their services for the sake of unbelievers. Both the revivalistic service of a previous generation and the "seeker service" of today are shaped by the same concern--appeal to the unchurched. Not surprisingly, in neither case does much that might be called worship by Christians occur. As a result, many evangelicals who have been sitting for years in such worship services are finding their souls drying up, and they have begun to long for something else.

Yesterday it was announced that Alex and Bret Harris will be releasing their new book, Do Hard Things, in April. Right now it is retailing for 16.99. I am hoping it is discounted quickly, I would love to do a small group on this book in youth group! (HT: JT)

A few days ago I cited an article by Frank Page on Calvinism. Turns out this article by Page has led to quite a bit of discussion on whether or not a candidate should be up front about his beliefs on the Doctrines of Grace. You can read the discussion here.

Many in academia are calling for young pastors that adhere to the doctrines of grace (Calvinistic) to be upfront and lay all their cards on the table. As you read the comments on Founders you will notice that some agree with this (as an issue of integrity) and others find it unfair. I am unsure of where I fall on this and am encouraging my readers to help me work through this issue (I know some of you are Calvinists and some of you are not).

As I am looking back I am wondering whether or not I would have been hired if I would have said upfront that I was a Calvinist. For one I was not nearly as established in the doctrines of grace as I am now. For two I know some of those on the search committee had (and maybe even to this day still have) a very vague understanding of what Calvinism is. I also know that many have false caricatures of what Calvinist actually believe and how a biblical Calvinist would actually engage people with the gospel. It appears to me that what people often reject is Hyper-Calvinism. Therefore, I wonder if all of the work that we have seen God do for the past 4 years would have been quenched from the beginning because I was a Calvinist. As soon as I stated what I believed about the Doctrines of Grace would I have been caricatured?

My stance has been to preach the gospel and to preach the word of God expositionally. If the doctrines of grace come out of the text then I will preach that. If the doctrines of grace are not in the text then I will never force it. My hope has been to be as biblical as possible in my life, practice, and ministry. Most people do not even know that I am a Calvinist. Does this make me dishonest? Many probably assume that I am a pre-tribulational pre-millenialist too. Should I have been upfront about that? Also my views have changed through the years on a few issues as well. What I might have said I believed in my interview I would disagree with now. To me "laying all your cards" on the table does not give room for growth for me (the minister) or for the congregation.

One of the funniest things that I remember was a conversation I had with a man in our church a couple of years ago. We were talking about some of the authors that we both enjoyed reading, as well as some of the Christian artists we loved to listen to. One of the bands that we were talking about we were discussing whether or not they are Calvinist, because they had cited John Piper as an influence. The guy I was speaking to began talking about all of the things he saw wrong with Calvinism. Their anti-evangelism, etc. All of the typical caricatures. Knowing my evangelistic zeal and passion to share the gospel, this man was floored when I told him that I too was a Calvinist. We did not get into a discussion on the theology of it, but by looking at my life and witness he saw that Calvinism does not necessarily lead to all of those horrible caricatures. (Thankfully, he could not smell the pride that emanated from me in my early caged-Calvinist days). So, my question to you is this: Am I deceptive for not sharing with our congregation that I am a Calvinist? Should I be upfront even if people do not ask? Is it right for me to make an issue of it? Or, is it a better approach to preach expositionally and only address the issue when they come up? What do you think?

Last night we completed our series on the Minor Prophets. As we reviewed each one of these prophets we saw that each is looking to something greater. Every book leaves us with nagging questions. It is almost impossible to paint a compelling enough picture for you of the heart and longing the Jewish people had for their coming Messiah. Therefore, when we look at the baby in the manger we are not filled with relief, excitement, wonder, and thankfulness at the long-awaited King.

The sermon is in only a little better than outline form, but you can find it here. Simeon knew that he held in his arms the Promised King. As the holiday season approaches we too must see Jesus as the Promised King.

Now there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon, and this man was righteous and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ. And he came in the Spirit into the temple, and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the Law, he took him up in his arms and blessed God and said, “Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace, according to your word; for my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel.”
And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him. And Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, “Behold, this child is appointed for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is opposed (and a sword will pierce through your own soul also), so that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed.” (Luke 2:25-35)

Today seems to be a little slow in blogworld.

Of all the books I have read one of the most frustrating has to be Frank Page's Trouble with the Tulip. Of all the articles I have read one of the most encouraging has been Frank's Page's recent article in the Baptist Press: Calvinism and Southern Baptists. (HT: Founders) Page will be the first to admit that he is not a Calvinist. In fact he believes it is a manmade doctrine. He is cited in his Tulip book as saying, "It is also important to remember that man-made doctrines always hurt God's work" (74). Also he believes that, "manmade doctrines always give way to God's Word" (75). Yet in all of this Page also says, "Most everyone who knows me knows that I am not a Calvinist. However, I have made it clear that I would be fair to those who are Calvinists in appointments in our convention. I have been true to my word. I believe that the issue of Calvinism is one that can be discussed within the family of Southern Baptists. I believe we need to have honest, open dialogue." Although I must question why a man, convinced that Calvinists hinder God's work and give way to God's Word, would appoint them to important posts in the Convention. I still respect his willingness to be open and to dialogue. I praise God for this and pray along with Page that we might have a Christ-like spirit and be diligent in our studies.

Do you ever wonder what the answer to church-wide immorality is? Brian Thornton offers a suggestion. His answer? Simple. Regeneration. Thornton also gives 9 suggestions for combating church-wide-immorality. Of his 9 suggestions one I especially like is #4, "Teach kids the same things as the adults". One that I might have worded differently is #7, where he suggest making the center of our worship the Word and Sacraments. I know that by making Word capital he is pointing us to Jesus, but I would have worded it a little differently. My suggestion: "make the Triune God as revealed in the Scriptures and displayed in the Sacraments the center of our worship".

Also today, Josh Harris continues his study on Affluenza, we are now on Part 4.

That's it so far today.

Two convictions frame the background for this post. 1) I believe that our ministries should be like Paul's: "I desired to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified". 2) Our primary motivation for preaching Christ should be nothing except His glory. We will deal with the second conviction first, then the deal with first conviction, and lastly attempt to tie both of these together.

When our primary motivation for preaching Christ becomes something other than His glory we get ourselves into many troubles. There are many secondary desires for preaching Christ that are right and good, but when elevated to the place of primary they become deadly. A prime example of this is "winning souls". If our prime motivation is to see people saved, then typically whatever we do to achieve this goal is justifiable. "If it reaches one soul then it was worth it". Therefore, we are taught to waver on unbiblical practices simply because it "won a soul".

Imagine this situation. A large group of teenagers are drawn to an event by motorcycles, appealing music, drama, food, and other teenagers. After a couple hours of cool motorcycle tricks and funny drama we hear a brief sermon. It does have a few Bible verses and a young man tells of how Jesus has changed his life. We are not told much about God. We are told even less about sin. We are certainly not told of what God requires of us. The "gospel" presentation is watered down at best. Then an invitation is given. Scores of students "come forward" to accept Jesus. They are prayed for and then they meet with counselors for about 15 minutes. During this time the counselors try to discern whether or not they are sincere in their "decision". They get some information, call them saved (so long as they are sincere and can repeat a prayer and nod their head at the right time, of course), and then send them back to their home church to get baptized.

Whether you believe that using motorcycles, drama, etc. in church is biblical or not is actually not the greater issue I am concerned with. I fall on the regulative principle "side" and figure that such "evangelistic tools" should not be used in our churches. The regulative principle is not the foundational issue. The foundational issue I am concerned with is the mindset that drives this type of event. Why is the gospel so "watered-down"? Certainly, it is so that lost people can understand it. The central reason for preaching Christ is, in this case, so that souls might be won. Therefore, we can water down the gospel in the hopes that it will be more appealing and win more souls for Jesus. Also, we have to have a way to keep track of these "decisions". Sometimes an altar call is enough; but, sometimes we are so successful that we have to get cards so that we can see "how many people made decisions". My main concern is that the gospel is neutered. My secondary concern is that people go home confused and often with a false sense of security.

This is a somewhat extreme example. Now imagine this situation. You are attending a conference on missions/evangelism. You hear some very startling statistics. You learn that every 1.7 seconds someone dies and goes to hell. (Which by the way is probably a fairly accurate statistic; and this should cause us concern). You also hear about our lack of evangelism. You think back upon your year and realize that you have not shared Christ with nearly as many people as you could have. You are plagued with guilt (and perhaps you should be). Then the speaker tells you a touching story of someone that he did not share Jesus with and blames himself for that person being in hell. You are urged to think of all your family members and friends that will be in hell within 100 years if you do not share the gospel with them. You go home; you are now depressed but have motivation to share the gospel with people. As you wake up the next morning it is still sticking with you, but you still struggle with fear--and now more guilt. Then the next day you are a little more numb. You continue down this cycle until next years evangelism conference and then you are reminded of your failure and vow to do better this time around. You wake up again to failure.

Now imagine this scene. You catch a vision of the majesty and holiness of God. You begin to realize that God is passionate about His glory. You begin to understand that God wants to spread His glory to the nations. Furthermore, you find that God is glorified whether souls are saved or not. Certainly we want to see souls saved; yet we are able to trust in the Lord's goodness and know that the preaching of His Word is a means to spread His glory to the nations. This causes you to realize that every time you share the gospel it is a "success". Your standard is no longer "how many decisions" but is instead "was God glorified". You still are convicted at times when you do not share the gospel. This time, however, it is different. You are not stricken with guilt because you sent somebody to hell. This time you feel a deep sense of conviction because you have valued man's opinion over the glory of God.

Do you see how this serves as a filter? The first scenario would never happen because you would be more concerned about faithfully proclaiming the gospel than about "winning souls". The second scenario would also be done away with. We can still share the statistics. We can still point out our failures to evangelism. But this time instead of being driven to an "I've got to do better" mentality we will be driven to the Cross. We will plead with God to show us more of His glory. We will repent of not treasuring Him over the fear of man. We will rest on His mercy to stir up in our hearts a proper motivation for evangelism. We will cry out for more compassion. We will plead with Him to stir in our hearts in such a way that we treasure His glory more than anything else.

I am not alone in my convictions either. Martin Lloyd-Jones found the same thing was true. As Lloyd-Jones began studying Scripture, and the sermons of many men that had been used by God in mighty ways, he found 5 things in common in each of their gospel presentations:

1. The supreme object of the work of evangelism is to glorify God, not to save souls
2. The only power that can do this work is the Holy Spirit, not our own strength
3. The one and only medium through which the Spirit works is the Scriptures; therefore, we “reason out of the Scriptures” like Paul did
4. These preceding principles give us the true motivation for evangelism-a zeal for God and a love for others
5. There is a constant danger of heresy through a false zeal and employment of unscriptural methods

Did you catch the first one? The supreme work of evangelism is to glorify God, NOT to save souls! Therefore, we see that our primary motivation for preaching Christ should be for His glory! Now why must we preach Christ alone? Why must we preach in such a way that we could say with Paul, I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified?

The reason that we must preach Christ alone is because that is how He is to be glorified. We do not display Jesus as a sufficient treasure when we preach Christ plus something else. If Jesus needs motorcycles to be attractive then He must not be that precious of a treasure. The way we preach Christ displays how much we value Him as a sufficient treasure! There is a great snippet from a Spurgeon sermon at Pulpit magazine's blog today that fits well here; The Importance of Preaching Christ. Spurgeon's central thesis is this: "You [as preachers] have nothing else to employ as the means of good, except the salvation of Jesus, and there is nothing else worth telling."

Therefore, I encourage you to preach Christ. Do it boldly. And do it without ribbons and without bows. And when you are preaching Christ do not do it with the ulterior motive of "winning souls". God will do that work. You preach Christ and Christ alone for His glory alone! Remember the greatest Christmas present came without gift wrapping!

The Shepherd's Scrapbook has released its Top 30 books of 2007. Topping the list this year is the ESV Literary Bible and Waltke's OT Theology. As I scroll through this list I see about 5 or 6 that are on my wish list. Looks like I need to update my list.

Dan Philipps has an excellent post at Pyromaniacs; where he considers the Danger of Confessions. Philipps central contention is this: "while I find much help, encouragement, and instruction in the great confessions, I have to remember: Satan may sift the body of which I am a part. I may find myself alone. Will I be able to say "I believe, and I have come to know"? This is a great question to ask ourselves. I have great fellowship with many of my Reformed brothers, but if they go south on matters of ecclesiology am I am able to stand up for what I believe?

Why do so many men not write like this anymore: "And as often as we muse on Christ the fire burns with us also. And the longer we muse on Him, and the deeper our musing goes, the more the fire burns. And this fire never sinks low, far less ever dies out, as long as we so muse. Think enough, meditating enough, musing enough on Christ, will do it. Thinking that always ends in prayer, and in praise, and in repentance unto life, and in ever new obedience, that will do it. Think you see Christ all through the Four Gospels. Think you see Him die at the end of the Four Gospels. Think you see Him rise again. Think you see Him ascend up into heaven. Think that it is the day of judgment. And think you see the books opened, - till you cry to Him continually day and night, Rock of Ages, cleft for me!" The words are from Alexander Whyte and come to us via The Vossed World. Now it seems like many have abandoned "musing" for "doing". Could it be possible that deep musing creates deep doing? Could it be that the reason we often only see superficial change is because we spend a vast majority of our time thinking and doing that which is superficial?

Brian at Voice of the Sheep has a great article on the visible church. He wonders how often does the world see the church gathering in a public setting. Even on Wednesday's and Sunday's all the world sees are our cars. Therefore, his suggestion is this: Do more things in public with your church body so that the world will see you together with one another. (HT: Challies)