Piper and DeYoung

Did you guys watch this? I thought it was really good, but then I found out Kevin DeYoung is only 34 (and so am I). I'm glad they ended with progress is possible!

Part One



Part Two

"Specials" and "Solos"

What do you guys think is the best way to approach specials and/or solos in a church? Is it ever appropriate to have them? I'm not a fan, and I think the corporate gathering is certainly primarily about the people of God worshipping together (with one voice). I also do not like the fact that we live in such an entertainment driven culture, which seems to only fuel the desire for these 'specials' within the corporate worship gathering. My question, however, is what are your thoughts Biblically? Are they always inappropriate? Or is there freedom here?

Romans 6:4

As I'm thinking through my sermon for this coming Sunday morning, a phrase in Romans 6:4 has me thinking. Now, I haven't yet looked at any commentaries, and it may be a very simple answer. However, I thought I'd ask it and hope that maybe someone on here would answer (if you still stop by here).

Why does Paul say that Christ was "raised from the dead by the glory of the Father?" Why not the power or something like that? Or maybe even for the glory of the Father? Just curious to get your thoughts before (or as) I consult some commentaries.

10 Things An Effective Minister Must Remember

from Doug Wilson

1. You are a minister of Christ, for the people. You are not a minister of the people, for Christ. Always preach Jesus.

2. Acknowledge your sins to God, and do what He says to do about them.

3. Your principal credentials for ministry are maintained, or not, within your marriage and family.

4. Your family is a community within the larger community of your ministry. But this community of family still needs to be a gated community.

5. Your toolbox is the Bible, always the Bible. It is the only book you have that is infallible and absolute.

6. If this makes you neglect other books, it is proof that you are neglecting the one book you pretend to have.

7. You are to preach, teach, lead, admonish, and encourage with authority. Don't do it like a muttering scribe.

8. Surround yourself with men who respect you, not men who cater to you.

9. Attack sin from the pulpit. Proclaim grace from the pulpit. You have a high vocation that should require some level of courage. Thunder the Word.

10. In the fulfillment of the Great Commission, never forget the big picture. The point is the success of the army, and your church is simply a platoon. You should want a successful platoon, of course, but only to the extent that it advances the larger mission. And always remember that Jesus is the supreme commander.

Raised for our Justification

"[Christ] was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification."  Romans 4:25
What does it mean that Jesus was "raised for our justification"?  Anybody have any insight into this?

Concerning Church Covenants...

I'm always fascinated by the heavy emphasis many evangelicals put on written church covenants. I do see some practical value of having one (sort of a "written contract" with other believers - something that you can hold people to), but honestly I'm rather cautious about insisting upon something this serious that is not clearly defined for us in the NT. Don't get me wrong - I'm certainly not opposed to all use of non-scriptural practical elements (nursery, sound systems, offering bags/plates, air conditioning) in churches, but an actually written covenant (signed or not signed) seems to be in a different league than padded pews or visual aids, at least in my mind. And I'm not sure I can defend written church covenants on any grounds other than they sure are very practical... and I'm not real comfortable with that conclusion. What do you guys think about church covenants? The good, the bad, and the ugly...

Anti-Contextualization

Not exactly what Jonathan Leeman is espousing in this post (Yin-Yang Contextualization), but it is interesting and counter to the "contextualization" rage these days. Here's what he says he has learned from Mark Dever:

He has a good eye for locating the particular weakness of a culture and then adopting practices that directly run against those weakness. For instance,

• We live in an entertainment-driven culture, and so he works hard to make sure our corporate gatherings don't cater to that desire among Christians and non-Christians.
• We live in a highly emotivisitc culture, and so he's careful not to use overly dramatic sermon illustrations that play to that desire for an emotional rush.
• We live in a style-conscious and celebrity-driven culture, and so he dresses plainly/unremarkably, puts someone else in the pulpit around 35% of the year, and generally promoted the leadership of others.

What do we make of this? This seems to run in the opposite direction of what we're being told we must do to be relevant and draw folks to our church. If they want the word, give it to them. If they want entertainment, emotionalism, or a cool, rockstar pastor, be very careful not to do/be those things. What do you think?

Preaching on John 7:53-8:11

You guys might have already seen Piper's latest sermon on John 7:53-8:11.  It's the story of the woman caught in adultery, and the vast majority of NT scholars believe it should not be in our Bibles.  Piper spends half his sermon explaining textual transmission and why he believes the story is not the Word of God.  He spends the second half bringing out some great points from the text which he warrants by the fact that these truths are taught elsewhere in the bible.  Its a really interesting sermon on a really tricky text.

My question: what would you guys do?  Have you guys preached through John?  Would you skip the passage?  Would you preach the passage but with some disclaimers?

Mark Chanski

Hey guys - I just thought I'd mention that I've been greatly blessed the last couple of days listening to some sermons by Mark Chanski.  He seems particularly gifted at using striking illustrations and making helpful practical applications.  These are two areas where I am in great need of help in my own preaching.  I thought I'd post a little recommendation for you guys to check his sermons out.  They're on sermonaudio.

Who Pastors Pastors?

I know, I know, it sounds funny to say (or write) - even redundant. But I'm asking a serious question. And I'm not thinking local church government, controversial apostolic authority, or denominational hierarchy here guys - just a real honest question.

Who should pastors go to when they need their souls to be pastored?

Interesting Thought on Sermon Titles from Doug Wilson's Blog

"It should be noted in passing that this is an important purpose in an announced or printed sermon title -- to help upset the equilibrium. Most titles tend to do the reverse. They appear to be drawn from the sermon's conclusion (the scratch rather than the itch). As a result, the preacher has to move backward from the announced title in order to arrive at the beginning of the sermon itself. A title known in advance of a sermon should itself be ambiguous -- making listeners wonder what the sermon will be about" (Lowry, The Homiletical Plot, p. 31).


What do you guys think?  According to this, my titles have been pretty boring (usually a basic statement of the subject of the sermon).  For example, here are my next four sermon titles as we work our ways through Romans 3:9-18:


Total Depravity - III
Total Depravity - IV
Total Depravity - V
Total Depravity - VI


Pretty creative, huh?

Really long sermons... thoughts?

Recent post by Gary Hendrix.  Thought it was interesting.

Sabbatarianism?

I will soon be preaching a series on the Ten Commandments. In my preliminary preparations I have been considering the fourth commandment especially, the command to remember the Sabbath.

I got a hold of Al Mohler's book on the Ten Commandments, "Words from the Fire." In it he presents a seemingly strong case for the non-sabbatarian view, what he calls "Lord's Day observance."

Basically his arguments are

1) there is no universal recognition among peoples around the world of a Sabbath pattern like in Israel (ie. it is not written into the law of nature as are the other commandments),

2) the Sabbath as a day of rest emerges only in the Mosaic period,

3) the observance of the Sabbath is similar to that of circumcision, which was used to indicate the otherness of Israel,

4) worship is added to the Sabbath only in the NT times,

5) Jesus declared the he was the fulfillment and Lord of the Sabbath,

6) the practice of the NT Christians was not to observe the Sabbath, but to gather for worship on the Lord's Day (Sunday) in connection to the resurrection,

7) the NT church gathered for worship on the Lord's Day although they probably would have worked at other parts of the day (per Roman culture),

8) in Christ fulfilling the Sabbath, "whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his" (Heb. 4:9-10),

9) the practice of Christians for this new day, the Lord's Day, is primarily fulfilled in gathering together as a church to worship, devoting the day to its namesake.

What do you think? What's your view? What are some articles/books/publications that give strong evidence for sabbatarianism or non-sabbatarianism?

Multisite?

I'm sure you've all looked into the pros and cons of multisite churches. I have gone back and forth on the issue myself. As of today (and for the past year or so), I have not been in favor of multisite. My understanding of preaching in the life of the church has caused me to think it's not best. This morning I read Kevin DeYoung's thoughts here. Since I was already leaning this way, this seemed to cement my thoughts even more. I like that he is quick to say it's not sin to have multisite, and that there may be appropriate times for them, but certainly not his preference. What are your thoughts?

Interesting Article on Expository Preaching

Dr. Iain Murray argues that verse-by-verse preaching may not be best for many preachers.  He says that...

1.  Preachers have different gifts and some work better from selected texts (a la Spurgeon) rather than working slowly through chapters or books.

2.  The verse-by-verse approach too often becomes all about conveying as much information about the Bible as possible, but preaching should be as much about stirring up and awakening people as informing and instructing them.

3.  Historically (in Scotland), the verse-by-verse approach was used mainly in lecture settings and not in the main worship service of the church.

4.  Verse-by-verse preaching may not be the most helpful to our people, especially if we allow our preaching to become something of a dry, dull running commentary.

5.  Evangelistic preaching doesn't fit well with the verse-by-verse model.

Your thoughts?

Shepherding your Family

I posted some ways on my blog that I'm working on in my home to shepherd my family well. However, I know there are ways to improve. What have you found helpful for you and your family?

Regarding Method and Message

This post is more like a ramble with questions attached than a well thought-out article. Forgive me.

If you're not subscribed to Darryl Hart's blog, you probably should be. Good thoughtful stuff all around.

A couple of weeks ago he threw this out as the worst Christian video of the year and I would readily agree. Ugh!


What I wasn't expecting was for him to say that it was "even worse" than Christian hip hop. The video below is the example he gives.


Now I get the deal about the method and the message... the forms and content... they don't exist in vacuums. I'm not saying that I know exactly how they relate and affect each other, but I do believe they do. But I must say that these two videos, as far as I can tell, have very little in common.

Nonetheless, in the comments section Hart says that, "I would claim [rap] is not a fitting vehicle for sound doctrine on doctrinal, cultural, and aesthetic grounds." And later he says, "when it comes to the sorts of virtues for which Paul calls in Titus 2, modesty, self-control, submissiveness, does rap really come to mind as the first cultural expression you’re going to offer to Paul as “man, this sure is fitting sound doctrine, isn’t it?”"

So, what do you think? Does Hart have a point? Is there a point at which content overcomes form, or does the form always affect the content in some way?

And so you can get the full context of Hart's post, here it is in full: Worst Christian Video of the Year.

Prayer Life

I don't know about you, but I certainly could use some help in my prayer life. Over the years I've had times of strong prayer, and time of weak prayer. I want to be more consistent in my prayer life. What are some ways you guys foster prayer in your own life? How do you help model/teach it to your congregations?

Also, speaking of prayer, are any of you attending the Desiring God Conference for Pastors this year?

Getting the Ball Rolling...Again

Its time to get this blog going again.

Here's a question: Should we treat teenagers in our churches as adults and incorporate them into adult Sunday School classes, etc., or should we keep them separated? Which is wisest? Which serves them best?