The Blinding Effect of Woundedness

In Tim Keller’s book on marriage, The Meaning of Marriage, he explains the effect that woundedness has on us.  It makes us self-absorbed.  It’s easy to think of other people when reading this quote.  But truth is, it’s pointing right at me:

Woundedness makes us self absorbed…This is not hard to see in others, of course. When you begin to talk to wounded people, it is not long before they begin talking about themselves. They’re so engrossed in their own pain and problems that they don’t realize what they look like to others. They are not sensitive to the needs of others. They don’t pick up the cues of those who are hurting, or, if they do, they only do so in a self-involved way. That is, they do so with a view of helping to “rescue” them in order to feel better about themselves. They get involved with others in an obsessive and controlling way because they are actually meeting their own needs, though they deceive themselves about this. We are always, always the last to see our self-absorption. Our hurts and wounds can make our self-centeredness even more intractable. When you point out selfish behavior to a wounded person, he or she will say, ‘Well, maybe so, but you don’t understand what it is like”. The wounds justify the behavior.  (Keller, The Meaning of Marriage)

This applies to far more than just marriage.  I’m convinced that the only way out of such a self-absorption is to fervently turn our heads away from our wounds and believe that these little deaths are swallowed up in the victory won by the stripes of the Suffering Servant. 

His wounds and not mine are what define me. 

Pastor Porn

This is from a 2009 interview that Garrett Wishall conducted with Tim Keller.  The question is narrowed to “20-something pastors” because it appeared in Towers, which is Southern Seminary’s newspaper.  But what Keller says here applies to pastors and church leaders of any age.

Q: What safeguards should 20-something pastors have in place to avoid the idolatry of ministry fame and the attitude of big numbers equals success?

Tim Keller: If you know it is a danger, that is a very important start. Additionally, when you find yourself unusually discouraged because things aren’t growing or people aren’t listening to you — you have to catch yourself. You have to realize ‘This is an inordinate amount of discouragement, which reveals the idolatry of justification by ministry.’ Meaning, you say you believe in justification by grace, but you feel like and are acting like you believe in justification by ministry. You have to recognize you are making something of an idol out of ministry. When you do experience inordinate discouragement because things aren’t going well, you need to say, ‘It’s okay to be discouraged but not to be this discouraged. This is discouragement that leads to idolatry,’ and you repent.

Additionally, idols create a fantasy world. You may think that you are just thinking about ministry strategy, but it could be you’re fantasizing about success. So be careful about doing too much daydreaming about success, what you would like to see happen. Because it’s really a kind of pornography. You’re actually thinking about a beautiful church and people acclaiming you: be careful about fantasizing too much about ministry success and dreaming about it and thinking about what it’s going to look like.

-----

Did you catch that Keller said dreaming of ministerial success is a type of pornography?  Perhaps there is some connection here with the fact that a horribly ridiculous amount of pastors also have pornography addictions.  But I think all of us may struggle with this type…dreaming of success and committing ministry idolatry. 

Evidence.  I came across this post because I’m discouraged today.  I’m discouraged because I feel as if I am working my tail off to write better, to write more, and expand my writing ministry.  It’s not happening. 

Ill be honest and say that I’m a little discouraged with other ministry stuff today too.  I feel almost unnecessary.  I’m just being honest.  And as I began to feel the weight of discouragement I remembered something I read at a prior date (I think from CJ Mahaney) about the relationship between discouragement and idolatry.  So, I did a Google search and came across this article. 

Yep.  I have idol problems and I need Jesus.  May my passion be to further His kingdom instead of my own.  Thank you Jesus for loving me enough to destroy my idolatrous heart that only rips me off with mock success.

Gospel Presentations

I was given a fun little assignment the other day.  Our church is passing out balloons at a local event and we are tying to the balloon a little handout.  My assignment was to write a gospel presentation, “simple enough for a fifth grader”, on about a 4 x 6 inch space.  I had about 240 words. 

If you have never done an exercise like this I encourage you to try it.  It’s easy to be critical of short gospel presentations but it is much more difficult to write one.  That is why this article by Tim Keller was so helpful: The Gospel in All its Forms.

Keller reminds us that when “studying Paul's gospel speeches in the book of Acts, it is striking how much is always left out.”  Therefore, Keller does not put all the gospel points in one gospel presentation.  What he means by that is that you do not have to say everything about the gospel every time that you share the gospel.  Obviously there are essentials that must be in every gospel presentation—but it will appear in different forms. 

I like the God, Man, Christ, Response Model.  But what do I say about God?  What part of man do I focus on?  What aspect of the atonement do I center in on?  How much do I put about response?  If I have 250 words how many do I use on each point?  Do I make the presentation response heavy, sin heavy, work of Christ heavy, or character of God heavy? 

While leaning heavily on Keller I have come up with these principles for a gospel presentation. 

1. Consider your audience.  My audience is a German community that is primarily Catholic.  I thought given the context a belief in God would be somewhat assumed, so I minored on that point.  But I majored on the finished work of Christ.  I thought it unwise to major on the response section.  Given a different audience I think I would emphasize different points. 

2. Don’t Confuse Implications of the Gospel with the Gospel.  This keeps us from starting in the wrong place and finishing in the wrong place.  A gospel presentation needs to be primarily focused on the finished work of Jesus—no matter how it is balanced.  Sin cannot be redefined or redirected.  The work of Christ can never be assumed.  The gospel is not, “if you don’t have peace, Jesus can give you peace”.  That’s an implication of the gospel. 

3. Know Where the Power Lies.  The power to convert is not in my catchiness, simplicity, or wordiness.  The power of the gospel lies in the Holy Spirit communicating biblical truth to people’s hearts and minds.  Therefore, I need to focus more on being biblically faithful than “simple”.  What I mean is that if I have to take out key elements so someone can understand or swallow the gospel then it’s quite possible they are not at a spot to receive Christ.

4. Don’t Be Afraid to Tell a Story.  Sometimes the simplest way to communicate the gospel is to sum up the overall narrative of Scripture.  Don’t be afraid of doing this instead of a typical “what must I do to be saved”.  Be sure that the story is Christocentric, but don’t shy away from the Bible’s main story arc.

5. Leave the Door Open.  Obviously, if you cannot share everything that needs to be shared it may be wise to leave the door open for further communication.  Be certain that someone can contact you, the church, or someone that is a faithful gospel teacher.  Don’t close the door by assuring them that if they did a certain activity that they are certainly saved.  Keep it open—share the gospel, and let the Holy Spirit give assurance. 

Anything you’d like to add or interact with?

The Beauty of Criticism From Both Sides

Tim Keller recently brought forth a few gems from Martin Lloyd-Jones concerning doctrine and living.  This is one particular quote I found challenging and yet refreshing:

It seems to me that we have a right to be fairly happy about ourselves as long as we have criticism from both sides… For myself, as long as I am charged by certain people with being nothing but a Pentecostalist and on the other hand charged by others with being an intellectual, a man who is always preaching doctrine, as long as the two criticisms come, I am very happy. But if one or the other of the two criticisms should ever cease, then, I say, is the time to be careful and to begin to examine the very foundations.

You would be well served to read the entire article. 

Monday’s Ministry Musing: Comprehensible Church

Awhile back, we asked this question: what should the church look like to an unbeliever on a Sunday morning?  Should it be a catering church—primarily for the unbeliever, or should it be a comprehensible—primarily for the believer, but understandable to the unbeliever?

Shortly after that I wrote about the catering church.  One systematic theology paper, a ton of reading, and a T4G conference later we return to this topic.  Today we sum this up by considering the comprehensible church. 

I get this language from Tim Keller (see here), who gets this language from 1 Corinthians 14.  The comprehensible church is also very passionate about reaching lost people; and even doing so through their local gathering on a Sunday morning.  But there is a difference, the comprehensible church is primarily for the believer and the salvation of an unbeliever is a by-product. 

There are some churches that overreact to the attractional model of church.  They, in my opinion, rightly understand that a churches gathering is primarily for believers.  But they wrongly, in my opinion, neglect to speak to unbelievers that may be in their midst.  Some that overreact can give off a vibe that creates an “us versus them” mentality.  Obviously, this is not making worship comprehensible. 

To be a comprehensible church your primary concern is to feed the flock on a Sunday morning (obviously through being faithful to Christ in preaching and worship).  Your language and actions would be understandable to an unbeliever but not geared towards them.  The beauty of the gospel is that it is applicable to believers and unbelievers.  There is a way of preaching that can both edify the saints and present Christ to the unbeliever. 

What does a comprehensible church look like on Sunday morning?

The gospel is always presented clearly; but the sermon and worship service is not geared around the “time of decision” at the end of church.

During certain stages during the gathering of believes an explanation is offered.  Example: “The reason why we have a time dedicated to giving of offerings is because we believe…”  We do not assume that the unbeliever understands why we do what we do.

The preacher does not shy away from teaching on theology or using theological terms, but he is careful to clearly define them. 

The songs selected are unashamedly centered around biblical truth.  They are chosen for content (lyrics) not for instrumentation (how it sounds).  Note: this does not mean that it’s lame and not well done.  See Bob Kauflin for an example of leading worship comprehensibly. 

Everything that you see present is there because it survived the question.  By the question I mean, “What does God think”?  Obviously, the answer is found in the way worship is prescribed through Scripture.  Churches will answer this differently, some more faithful to the text than others.  Regardless, the mark of a comprehensible church is that it is primarily concerned about what God thinks of the gathering.  What you see on a Sunday morning is not there because, “this may draw an unbeliever”.  It is there because it pleases God and it may be a means that GOD uses to draw an unbeliever. 

Effects on the church as a whole

Evangelism is not centered around an event (Sunday morning) but is the lifestyle of the equipped people of God. 

The gospel is applied deeply to believers lives.  The gospel message is not simply presented at the end of the message to provoke a time of decision.  Nor is the “gospel message” relegated to a 45 minute appeal to the unbeliever to convert.  The gospel message is that the cataclysmic work of Christ impacts every area of our lives—believer and unbeliever—and the preacher spends however long he preaches fleshing out the impact of what Christ has done.  Therefore, rather than hearing sermons on 5 steps to a healthy marriage the believer is given confidence that the gospel ought to, and in fact does, penetrate even the marriage. 

Believers are less likely to be “tossed to and fro” because the teaching on Sunday morning is geared more towards their edification.  Let’s face it, in most churches a small percentage of Christian people will be involved in small groups or other discipleship programs.  In the comprehensible church believers will get a more steady diet instead of milk every week. 

The Preacher’s Question:

If you are a preacher there are a few questions to make this practical.

• You have done all of the study work of understanding the passage.  Now you are at the stage of determining how best to preach this passage.  Do you think primarily of the unbeliever or the believer?  Keep in mind your primary charge is to feed the sheep. 
• As you scan through your sermon to the sheep, do you look for words that would need to be made plain to an unbeliever?  Keep in mind you are called to be comprehensible. 
• Do you have a point in the sermon where you make the gospel explicitly clear?  Keep in mind you are called to proclaim the gospel. 

Is it clear now the difference between the catering church and the comprehensible church? 

Keller on The Gospel v. Religion

I do not simply mean by ‘gospel-centered’ that ministry is to be doctrinally orthodox. Of course it must certainly be that. I am speaking more specifically.

(1) All religions operate on the principle - “I obey--therefore I am accepted by God.” The basic operating principle of the gospel is - “I am accepted by God through Christ--therefore I obey.” Two people living their lives on the basis of these two principles may (do!) sit right beside one another in the pew--and both are strive to obey God’s law, to pray, to give money generously, to be good family members. But they are doing so out of radically different motives, in two radically different spirits, resulting in two radically different personal characters. Since it is easier to understand the difference between the gospel and irreligion, let’s lay out the differences of religion and the gospel.

(2) We must communicate the gospel clearly--not a click toward legalism and not a click toward license. Legalism/moralism is truth without grace (which is not real truth); relativism is grace without truth (which is not real grace). To the degree a ministry fails to do justice to both, it simply loses life-changing power.

(3) I can't tell you how important this is in all mission and ministry. Unless you distinguish the gospel from both religion and irreligion--from both traditional moralism and liberal relativism--then newcomers in your services will automatically think you are simply calling them to be good and nice people.

From Being the Church in Our Culture

All of Life is Repentance

Steve McCoy has done the church a service by making available in one location everything Tim Keller.  One such article he links to is this one: All of Life is Repentance.  In this article Keller compares religious repentance to gospel repentance. 

Religious repentance, says Keller, is "selfish, self-righteous, and bitter all the way to the bottom”.  It is selfish because we only do it to avoid punishment.  It is self-righteous because we can be duped into doing it as a means of atonement.  And it is bitter because, “in religion our only hope is to live a good enough life for God to bless us.  Therefore every instance of sin and repentance is traumatic, unnatural, and horribly threatening.  Only under great duress does a religious person admit they have sinned because their only hope is their moral goodness.” 

Contrast this with gospel repentance that hates sin because of love for God.  Gospel repentance receives grace rather than trying to earn it through self punishment.  And finally a firm understanding of the gospel does not produce bitterness but rather joy in repentance.  As Keller nicely sums up, “The more you see your own flaws and sins, the more precious, electrifying, and amazing God’s grace appears to you.  But on the other hand, the more aware you are of God’s grace and acceptance in Christ, the more you [are] able to drop your denials and self-defenses and admit the true dimensions of your sin.”

When you understand the difference between religious repentance and gospel repentance then, and only then, can you begin “to profit from a regular and exacting discipline of self-examination and repentance”.  Keller then uses a statement by George Whitefield to put together a few questions to foster gospel-centered repentance:

• Deep Humility v. Pride
• Burning love v. indifference
• Wise courage v. anxiety
• Godly motivations (a single eye)

You’ll have to read the whole article to see how Keller expounds upon these…it’s only two pages and well worth your time. 

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 03/16-19

Nathan White tells a very heart-felt story about his confrontation with a beggar and then asks a very intriguing question.

I am very intrigued by the series that Phil Johnson is beginning on contextualization. This is a very interesting discussion that is going on in the church. It seems to be one of those things that keep coming up in my life. To be honest, I'm leaning towards what Phil is saying here. Read his introduction here.

This one is for bloggers; Timmy Brister provides live-blogging tips.

The John 3:16 Conference continues to cause a stir. Oh, we who adhere to the doctrines of grace ought to brace ourselves for the bunk that is about to come our way. Dr. Galyon has pointed us in the direction of Jerry Choice Grace. All I can say after reading Grace's article, is "wow"...I am out of my "caged"-Calvinist phase. It's okay with me if you aren't Reformed minded. I understand, I was not at one point as well. But, to totally misrepresent and be so vitriolic is neither fitting to a Calvinist or an Arminian. Read Dr. Galyon's article and tell me what you think.

A few weeks ago I mentioned that Tim Keller spoke at the Google HQ. If you get a free hour watch this:
(HT: Buzzard)

Making Worship Comprehensible to Unbelievers

I have a confession to make. I've never really read much of anything by Tim Keller. I know he's one of the elite. I know I should read his stuff. I just haven't. At least not much. Until tonight. I dedicated time to my first article by Keller. You can read it here. It discusses Evangelistic Worship. One of Keller's points is that we ought to make our worship service comprehensible to the unbeliever. Here are his seven sub-points on how we make the worship service comprehensible:

1. Worship and preaching ought to be in the "vernacular"
2. Explain the service as you go along
3. Directly address and welcome unbelievers
4. Have quality aesthetics
5. Celebrate deeds of mercy and justice
6. Present the sacraments so as to make the gospel clear
7. Preach grace

What do you think? Be certain to read the article, focus on page 4-10. Is it necessary to preach in the vernacular? Ought we change words like propitiation, to make them more "clear"? Are quality aesthetics necessary? Is this trying to be too smooth? Should the church toot her own horn, for unbelievers? Is this not letting our deeds be known before men? Are the sacraments for unbelievers, believers, or both? How will we edify the body if we "preach grace" every Sunday? Don't we need to move on from these elementary things?
I am pretty certain that I know what I believe on these issues. I am interested, though, to learn what you think? Is Keller on target? Should we even make the worship "comprehensible" for unbelievers? Isn't the service for the believer and God?

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 03/04-06

Google is really popular. I love Google. I use Google. But I am sure that some/many of the folks at Google need Jesus. My heart was happy to hear of Tim Keller receiving the opportunity to preach the gospel at the Google HQ. Justin Buzzard was there and blogged on Keller's message. What an awesome opportunity, I pray that the Holy Spirit preached the gospel to their hearts. (HT: Challies)

Tim Bayly asks Where Have All the Father's Gone? It's a pretty good article and makes the way for really good discussion. Maybe all of the suggestions are not the best, but it is a great article. (HT: Jared Wilson)

C.J. Mahaney points to an address by Jeff Purswell. In it he gives a humbling and earth-shattering statement to those of us that preach the gospel, "You are a standing in the very stead of God".

Eric Simmons has wonderful suggestions on how to pick a movie. His goal is to offer suggestions to help reduce these moments: "Have you ever had that really uncomfortable and convicting sense after watching a movie? You think, “Uh, that one might’ve been a mistake” or “I’m not so sure I should’ve watched that..."

Joshua Hitchcock of the Reformed Mafia gives us a great article and encouragement to not minimize the gospel. Great reminder of the Puritan culture and their refusal to minimize the gospel.

Tim Challies has a touching story about what it means to love our neighbor (even if they are a nuisance) without grumbling.

Is it possible to have masculinity without manhood? Albert Mohler comments on that question. I particularly like his closing statement: "We lie to ourselves if we believe that we can hold onto a healthy masculinity without honoring true manhood."

Michael Patton asks a very important question, Can a Christian Theology Allow for Abortion?

In our guys Bible study we are studying the Book of Job. A great question that comes out of that would be, how could I have joy if I had the afflictions of Job? C.J. Mahaney attempts to answer that question, Finding Joy in Adversity.

Calvinists beware! Many of us across the blogosphere have our ears open for the rumblings of the upcoming John 3:16 Conference. Tom Ascol throws the first challenge, encouraging us to listen and not get our tulips all ruffled. Nathan Finn also joins the conversation, here.

Perry Noble gives 5 things you should never hear from a staff member.

John Piper makes a clarification on a statement he made at The Resurgence. What is his view on Arminians in education? Find out here.

Should I find this funny?

Borrowed Light: Today in Blogworld 01/21

Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Early on John Piper challenged us to Not Waste the MLK Weekend. Piper also quoted at length from King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail. MLK's full I Have A Dream speech is accessible at the bottom of this post. It is such an amazing speech. Only 1600 words but riveting. (HT: JT) Said at Southern has numerous links today on Racism, Christianity, and America.

Last day of Challies blog tour. Today he visits Sharper Iron. They asks, "How does Scripture tell us to view discernment as a step of rational thought guided by the Holy Spirit, rather than a supra-rational sixth sense?" Find the answer here.

Over the weekend Justin Taylor interviewed Tim Keller. If you are not familiar with Keller you should be.

Phil Johnson continues his series on Total Depravity. Today he considers In What Sense is Depravity Total. A great summation is this statement: "Human depravity is "total" in the same sense death is total. You can't be partly dead. You can be really, really sick or critically injured and on life support, but you're either dead or alive. There are no degrees of death." The Weekly Does of Spurgeon is centered upon the point of depravity as well. In this excerpt Spurgeon discusses How Depravity Necessitates Election.

Fred from Of First Importance shares this excellent quote by Alfred Poirier: “In light of God’s judgment and justification of the sinner in the cross of Christ, we can begin to discover how to deal with any and all criticism. By agreeing with God’s criticism of me in Christ’s cross, I can face any criticism man may lay against me. In other words, no one can criticize me more than the cross has. If you thus know yourself as having been crucified with Christ, then you can respond to any criticism, even mistaken or hostile criticism, without bitterness, defensiveness, or blame shifting. Such responses typically exacerbate and intensify conflict, and lead to the rupture of relationships. You can learn to hear criticism as constructive and not condemnatory because God has justified you.”

J.D. Hatfield discusses Moving On sometimes in evangelism.

Here is the "I Have a Dream Speech":