John Piper offers some sage advice on the upcoming election.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Happy Reformation Day!
Many don't realize that in 1517 Martin Luther deliberately used All Hallows Eve (Halloween), the night prior to All Saints Day, to nail his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church of Wittenburg, and thus officially begin what is now called the Reformation. I'm not a big Halloween guy, but I do love the Reformation. So in celebration of that glorious day when Luther began the fight to reclaim the gospel, I'm posting this. Reformation, Germany, celebration, polka. It all works, right?
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Acts 27-28: God Never Quits
Read Acts 27-28
God never quits. That seems to be the note on which Acts ends. God has a mission of salvation to accomplish, and nothing stands in its path. For this reason, Paul can confidently face terrifying, life-threatening circumstances with boldness and courage. It’s the reason, Paul can confidently proclaim the gospel to Roman Jews when he knows many of them will turn against him. It’s the reason, chains, shipwrecks, imprisonment does not thwart the advancement of the gospel.
God never quits. Salvation is his plan, his purpose, and advances in his power. And he never quits. It is so easy for the church to forget. How do we advance the gospel? How do we connect with the world? How do we build the church? If we forget that God has never quit, will never quit, our answers to those questions will be many, and they will all be wrong. I fear that so much of what is promoted as ideas for “church growth,” being “relevant,” “connecting with the culture,” etc. has at its base a failure to remember that God has not quit. Of course, there is nothing wrong with church growth, relevance, or connecting with the culture. No Christian should ever want no growth, irrelevance, or being disconnected from culture. Churches should think about these things and pursue these things. Nevertheless, I fear that much of what passes as good strategy is in reality built on forgetfulness of God’s involvement. We often don’t approach these issues with the confidence that God is on the move, that God will advance his glory, that He loves to save, that the church is precious to Him. Instead, we approach strategic planning with the anxious outlook that if we don’t get it just right, churches will fail, the gospel will die, and the culture will be lost. This anxious outlook further leads to a search for any and every new strategy that comes along and shows the slightest bit of promise. It matters little if it retains biblical fidelity or is gospel-centered. It works, enough said. When God quits, the church become pragmatists.
A great self-diagnosing question is to ask, “Am I (are we) going about this as if God has quit?” He doesn’t quit, and we should never forget it.
God never quits. That seems to be the note on which Acts ends. God has a mission of salvation to accomplish, and nothing stands in its path. For this reason, Paul can confidently face terrifying, life-threatening circumstances with boldness and courage. It’s the reason, Paul can confidently proclaim the gospel to Roman Jews when he knows many of them will turn against him. It’s the reason, chains, shipwrecks, imprisonment does not thwart the advancement of the gospel.
God never quits. Salvation is his plan, his purpose, and advances in his power. And he never quits. It is so easy for the church to forget. How do we advance the gospel? How do we connect with the world? How do we build the church? If we forget that God has never quit, will never quit, our answers to those questions will be many, and they will all be wrong. I fear that so much of what is promoted as ideas for “church growth,” being “relevant,” “connecting with the culture,” etc. has at its base a failure to remember that God has not quit. Of course, there is nothing wrong with church growth, relevance, or connecting with the culture. No Christian should ever want no growth, irrelevance, or being disconnected from culture. Churches should think about these things and pursue these things. Nevertheless, I fear that much of what passes as good strategy is in reality built on forgetfulness of God’s involvement. We often don’t approach these issues with the confidence that God is on the move, that God will advance his glory, that He loves to save, that the church is precious to Him. Instead, we approach strategic planning with the anxious outlook that if we don’t get it just right, churches will fail, the gospel will die, and the culture will be lost. This anxious outlook further leads to a search for any and every new strategy that comes along and shows the slightest bit of promise. It matters little if it retains biblical fidelity or is gospel-centered. It works, enough said. When God quits, the church become pragmatists.
A great self-diagnosing question is to ask, “Am I (are we) going about this as if God has quit?” He doesn’t quit, and we should never forget it.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Family Man
This is a pretty cool video. I'm currently laying in bed with my wife and baby. It's amazing.
Tim Keller, D. A. Carson, John Piper Conversation
There are few men in the evangelical world that I respect more than these three. How I would love to hear these three great, gospel loving minds in conversation. Thanks to the Gospel Coalition, we can. I'm only posting four of the videos. You can see them all here. They are worth the time if you have it. Otherwise, I would click on the first of the videos that I have posted and start listening around 7:30 mark when Keller starts talking about being Gospel-centered. From then on, their words are incredibly helpful as they apply the gospel to our fight with sin.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Acts 23:12-26:32: Incessant Evangelism
Read Acts 23:12-26:32
The vision of Paul set forth in this text I find extremely convicting. Here we see Paul as the constant, tenacious evangelist, yet the setting of his evangelism is the court room. Yes, the court room. Paul is repeatedly on trial for his life. While he presents powerful argumentation for his innocence, he preaches the gospel. To each of his examiners and judges he presents the facts as well as the truth of God's Word in hopes of not only being released but also of gaining a convert for Christ. Paul is somehow able to guide each case into a presentation of Christ. Being that he was imprisoned for his preaching of Jesus resurrection, it was not terribly difficult. But Paul went beyond presenting just facts.
First, when speaking with Felix and his wife Drusilla (Acts 24:24-25), Paul “reasoned about righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment.” Roman governors were not known for their moral scruples, and Felix was no different. In fact, Felix employed a “magician” to coax Drusilla to divorce her first husband and marry him. Can’t imagine Felix wanting to hear about righteousness, self-control, and the coming judgment. Notice Felix’s quick dismissal of Paul after the message. Not exactly the way to win friends. The explanation for Paul’s approach can only be that he was not as interested in winning a friend as he was in bringing sinners to repentance. I am repeatedly amazed by Christian leaders the urge us not to speak of “righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment” because people today don’t want to hear that. Whereas Felix and Drusilla did? If Christianity is a popularity contest, then these are taboo subjects. But it isn’t a popularity contest. It’s truth. Truth that makes an eternal difference. Therefore, popularity and likability can never replace this world’s desperate need to hear the truth of righteousness, self-control, and coming judgment.
Paul’s approach to Agrippa is entirely different. It is not that Agrippa had an upstanding moral character (Bernice is his slightly younger sister and apparently also lover), but he had a knowledge of the OT and Judaism. Knowing that Paul begins presenting more fully the whole gospel of Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT. Agrippa’s response: “In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian?”(26:28) Paul’s answer: “Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am”(26:29). I believe that there are many well-intentioned Christians who desire the same thing as Paul. Many do not lack the desire for others to turn to Jesus. What we lack is the correlating conviction that the gospel has the power to bring others to Jesus. In other words, our desire for other’s salvation ironically keeps us from sharing the gospel, because we are afraid of pushing them away. Paul wanted others to know Christ and believed the only way for that to happen was to present the truth about Jesus. The incessant evangelist is the one who can bring these two convictions together: a passion for the salvation of others and a confidence in the gospel. May God grant us more of each.
The vision of Paul set forth in this text I find extremely convicting. Here we see Paul as the constant, tenacious evangelist, yet the setting of his evangelism is the court room. Yes, the court room. Paul is repeatedly on trial for his life. While he presents powerful argumentation for his innocence, he preaches the gospel. To each of his examiners and judges he presents the facts as well as the truth of God's Word in hopes of not only being released but also of gaining a convert for Christ. Paul is somehow able to guide each case into a presentation of Christ. Being that he was imprisoned for his preaching of Jesus resurrection, it was not terribly difficult. But Paul went beyond presenting just facts.
First, when speaking with Felix and his wife Drusilla (Acts 24:24-25), Paul “reasoned about righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment.” Roman governors were not known for their moral scruples, and Felix was no different. In fact, Felix employed a “magician” to coax Drusilla to divorce her first husband and marry him. Can’t imagine Felix wanting to hear about righteousness, self-control, and the coming judgment. Notice Felix’s quick dismissal of Paul after the message. Not exactly the way to win friends. The explanation for Paul’s approach can only be that he was not as interested in winning a friend as he was in bringing sinners to repentance. I am repeatedly amazed by Christian leaders the urge us not to speak of “righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment” because people today don’t want to hear that. Whereas Felix and Drusilla did? If Christianity is a popularity contest, then these are taboo subjects. But it isn’t a popularity contest. It’s truth. Truth that makes an eternal difference. Therefore, popularity and likability can never replace this world’s desperate need to hear the truth of righteousness, self-control, and coming judgment.
Paul’s approach to Agrippa is entirely different. It is not that Agrippa had an upstanding moral character (Bernice is his slightly younger sister and apparently also lover), but he had a knowledge of the OT and Judaism. Knowing that Paul begins presenting more fully the whole gospel of Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT. Agrippa’s response: “In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian?”(26:28) Paul’s answer: “Whether short or long, I would to God that not only you but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am”(26:29). I believe that there are many well-intentioned Christians who desire the same thing as Paul. Many do not lack the desire for others to turn to Jesus. What we lack is the correlating conviction that the gospel has the power to bring others to Jesus. In other words, our desire for other’s salvation ironically keeps us from sharing the gospel, because we are afraid of pushing them away. Paul wanted others to know Christ and believed the only way for that to happen was to present the truth about Jesus. The incessant evangelist is the one who can bring these two convictions together: a passion for the salvation of others and a confidence in the gospel. May God grant us more of each.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
James 3 Video
How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! 6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. 7 For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, 8 but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. 10 From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so. 11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? 12 Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water (James 3:5b-12)
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Most Radical Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever
Princeton Professor Robert George weighs in on the issue of abortion in presidential politics. He argues that Obama is the most radical pro-abortion candidate ever to run for president. He builds a very strong case for that assertion and portrays a very frightening picture of America with Obama as president. This is the best article to date that I have seen on Obama's pro-abortion record. Read here.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Acts 21-23:11: Traditional and Trendy Walls
Read Acts 21-23:11
It is very easy to get people to hate you. Some Christians even think that it is their calling. The cross is an offense, so they conclude that the more they offend the more they are like Jesus. In fact, not only is this true of some Christians, it is true of many churches. They almost revel in the fact that they are disliked by the culture and communities around them. Some like being disliked because they are so zealous in their moral or religious scruples. Others like being disliked for their lack of moral or religious scruples. In this text, we see Paul as a man who is clearly hated by many. So there is something to this business of not being liked. Your popularity is certainly not the best sign of your effectiveness. The cross is an offense, Jesus was murdered, most of the apostles were martyred.
However, at the same time I think it is helpful in this text to see what Paul was and was not hated for. When Paul gets to Jerusalem, he immediately takes a purification ritual performed by zealous Jews. What is more revealing is the purpose for this ritual, to disprove the accusations that Paul was discouraging the practice of the law by the Jews. Whatever the Jews of the day believed about Paul, the notion that he hated the law and preached its abandonment was false. He was not hated for his cutting edge style of personal devotion. The indications are that in many ways, Paul kept up the traditions of the law.
There was one part of the current tradition that Paul absolutely abhorred, and that was the dislike, even hatred, of the Gentiles. Paul deliberately broke the rituals of separation with Gentiles (Galatians 2:11-14). And it was this aspect of Paul’s ministry that put him into so much trouble. The Jewish leaders erupted a riot against him in the temple because they thought he brought in a Gentile. They Jewish crowd quietly listened to Paul’s defense until he declared that God called him to go to the Gentiles (Acts 22:21-22). The Jewish leaders hated the gospel of Jesus, but what they hated more were the implications of the gospel that said all men can have the future and eternal blessings given to Israel in Jesus.
I think there is a helpful lesson here. Repudiating the sometimes unbiblical traditions (that is, traditions not clearly mandated in Scripture) in the church simply because they are old, aren’t cool, etc. seems out of sync with the example of Paul (and Jesus for that matter). What we should cast off are the traditions, attitudes, practices, etc. that result in the exclusion of outsiders. In other words, new vs. old or trendy vs. untrendy are not the categories Christians should think in. Arrogance vs. humility, legalism vs. repentance, traditions-centered vs. Christ-centered are the sorts of categories that Christians should think in. Sometimes certain Christian beliefs and practices will be trendy and other practices unpopular. Indeed, that is the way it has always been and always will be. Christianity and Jesus are always loved and hated for different reasons in different cultures and times. Nevertheless, inclusion into the Christian community should not depend upon one’s adherence to certain traditions but to one’s connection to Christ. Of course, this issue is complex and deserves more qualification. For example, the pattern of one’s life choices is the only way to determine one’s connection to Christ, so certain practices are necessary. But the general unqualified point is that we should seek to eliminate any dividing wall except that of Christ, and the dividing wall can be a trendy or traditional one.
It is very easy to get people to hate you. Some Christians even think that it is their calling. The cross is an offense, so they conclude that the more they offend the more they are like Jesus. In fact, not only is this true of some Christians, it is true of many churches. They almost revel in the fact that they are disliked by the culture and communities around them. Some like being disliked because they are so zealous in their moral or religious scruples. Others like being disliked for their lack of moral or religious scruples. In this text, we see Paul as a man who is clearly hated by many. So there is something to this business of not being liked. Your popularity is certainly not the best sign of your effectiveness. The cross is an offense, Jesus was murdered, most of the apostles were martyred.
However, at the same time I think it is helpful in this text to see what Paul was and was not hated for. When Paul gets to Jerusalem, he immediately takes a purification ritual performed by zealous Jews. What is more revealing is the purpose for this ritual, to disprove the accusations that Paul was discouraging the practice of the law by the Jews. Whatever the Jews of the day believed about Paul, the notion that he hated the law and preached its abandonment was false. He was not hated for his cutting edge style of personal devotion. The indications are that in many ways, Paul kept up the traditions of the law.
There was one part of the current tradition that Paul absolutely abhorred, and that was the dislike, even hatred, of the Gentiles. Paul deliberately broke the rituals of separation with Gentiles (Galatians 2:11-14). And it was this aspect of Paul’s ministry that put him into so much trouble. The Jewish leaders erupted a riot against him in the temple because they thought he brought in a Gentile. They Jewish crowd quietly listened to Paul’s defense until he declared that God called him to go to the Gentiles (Acts 22:21-22). The Jewish leaders hated the gospel of Jesus, but what they hated more were the implications of the gospel that said all men can have the future and eternal blessings given to Israel in Jesus.
I think there is a helpful lesson here. Repudiating the sometimes unbiblical traditions (that is, traditions not clearly mandated in Scripture) in the church simply because they are old, aren’t cool, etc. seems out of sync with the example of Paul (and Jesus for that matter). What we should cast off are the traditions, attitudes, practices, etc. that result in the exclusion of outsiders. In other words, new vs. old or trendy vs. untrendy are not the categories Christians should think in. Arrogance vs. humility, legalism vs. repentance, traditions-centered vs. Christ-centered are the sorts of categories that Christians should think in. Sometimes certain Christian beliefs and practices will be trendy and other practices unpopular. Indeed, that is the way it has always been and always will be. Christianity and Jesus are always loved and hated for different reasons in different cultures and times. Nevertheless, inclusion into the Christian community should not depend upon one’s adherence to certain traditions but to one’s connection to Christ. Of course, this issue is complex and deserves more qualification. For example, the pattern of one’s life choices is the only way to determine one’s connection to Christ, so certain practices are necessary. But the general unqualified point is that we should seek to eliminate any dividing wall except that of Christ, and the dividing wall can be a trendy or traditional one.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Love Songs to God
Here are a few good thoughts from Jonathan Dodson on contemporary worship music. Jonathan is a church planter in Austin, TX (one of the coolest cities around) and a personal friend.
Undercover Worshippers
Here is a frightening article in the Wall Street Journal on mystery worshippers. These are guys who go undercover in worship services as first time attenders. They then rate your church on a five star scale. All this is part of a new trend in church marketing--church consultant firms. I thought the most revealing comment was the pastor at the end who states that Cracker Barrel is his chief competition. Love to hear your thoughts.
Ernie Davis Story
This looks like a great movie and a great story. Ben Witherington offers some helpful commentary on the movie.
The Power of Stories
I just listened to Dan Taylor's talk at the DG 2008 National Conference on the power of story. This clip gives you some idea about where he is going. If you would like the whole thing, you can either watch it, download the audio, or read it here. His message is going to have a pretty major effect on how I preach, what I read, how I read the Bible, and how I communicate with others.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Acts 20: The Paradoxes of Paul
Read Acts 20
This passage more than any other reveals the emotional side of the apostle Paul. As such, it is probably the passage most reflective of Paul the man. In Paul I find man filled with paradoxes. I will just list a couple that I think helpful.
Passion and Compassion. Here we find a man so passionate about his mission that he is not willing to stop over in Ephesus to visit the church there because it would delay his mission (Acts 20:16). But at the same time he sends word to the elders of Ephesus to meet him at Miletus, and there bears his heart to them. He is man torn between the glory of his mission and his love for the people of the church. Nothing would deter him from moving forward in his mission, though he knew it would lead to his death (Acts 20:25; 21:13). He was willing to proclaim “anything that was profitable”(Acts 20:20), would not “shrink from declaring . . . the whole counsel of God,” and did not account his life of “any value” for the sake of the gospel (Acts 20:24). But his passion was not just for a cause. Paul also taught and admonished “with tears”(Acts 20:19, 31). He was broken for people and their salvation. In other words, he was not merely passionate for the mission of Christ to go forward, he was also filled with compassion for the people to which he spoke. Thus, in Paul I think we see true passion for Christ. The zeal that drives us to proclaim Christ must be saturated with a compassion for the people to whom we speak. If there is no compassion, then there probably is no passion. At least, there is no passion for Christ. There is merely passion for our own self-aggrandizement, a passion to be right, or a passion to appear righteous.
Boldness and Humility. In the most hostile environments, Paul would not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. We must remember that proclaiming the kingdom of God got the first leader of Christianity, Jesus, murdered, which was an event that happened in Paul’s lifetime. Paul knew that when he spoke his message would be despised by many and could very well result in his own murder. Yet so bold was Paul, his presence was apparently all that was needed to keep the “fierce wolves” at bay (Acts 20:29). As unintimidating as his physical presence was, he caused fear in his opponents. Paul was a man’s man. He was the little wirey guy that would stare down the biggest, ugliest thug without flinching and make him cry. Nevertheless, Paul served the church “with all humility and with tears”(Acts 20:19). He wasn’t just feared; he was deeply loved (20:36-38). So what makes a bold guy so meek? I think the very thing that made him bold made him humble. In think the key verse is Acts 20:24. He knew his purpose. Men who know their reason for existence are fiercely bold. They don’t need high approval ratings. Paul knew that he existed to testify to the gospel, period. Nothing less and nothing more. No additional value was attached to his life. In preaching Christ, his life fulfilled the only meaning that it had. To not preach Christ would save his life, but then it would be a life not worth living. This mentality results not only in boldness but also humility, for his value lies only in his message. Paul wasn’t concerned whether people loved Paul but whether they loved Christ. All the value went to Christ leaving nothing left over for Paul. The most humble people are always the most bold. Those who account no value to their life except that of their mission are always the most tenacious when it comes to their mission. And those who are mindful of their own value are the most cowardly when it comes to the mission.
This passage more than any other reveals the emotional side of the apostle Paul. As such, it is probably the passage most reflective of Paul the man. In Paul I find man filled with paradoxes. I will just list a couple that I think helpful.
Passion and Compassion. Here we find a man so passionate about his mission that he is not willing to stop over in Ephesus to visit the church there because it would delay his mission (Acts 20:16). But at the same time he sends word to the elders of Ephesus to meet him at Miletus, and there bears his heart to them. He is man torn between the glory of his mission and his love for the people of the church. Nothing would deter him from moving forward in his mission, though he knew it would lead to his death (Acts 20:25; 21:13). He was willing to proclaim “anything that was profitable”(Acts 20:20), would not “shrink from declaring . . . the whole counsel of God,” and did not account his life of “any value” for the sake of the gospel (Acts 20:24). But his passion was not just for a cause. Paul also taught and admonished “with tears”(Acts 20:19, 31). He was broken for people and their salvation. In other words, he was not merely passionate for the mission of Christ to go forward, he was also filled with compassion for the people to which he spoke. Thus, in Paul I think we see true passion for Christ. The zeal that drives us to proclaim Christ must be saturated with a compassion for the people to whom we speak. If there is no compassion, then there probably is no passion. At least, there is no passion for Christ. There is merely passion for our own self-aggrandizement, a passion to be right, or a passion to appear righteous.
Boldness and Humility. In the most hostile environments, Paul would not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. We must remember that proclaiming the kingdom of God got the first leader of Christianity, Jesus, murdered, which was an event that happened in Paul’s lifetime. Paul knew that when he spoke his message would be despised by many and could very well result in his own murder. Yet so bold was Paul, his presence was apparently all that was needed to keep the “fierce wolves” at bay (Acts 20:29). As unintimidating as his physical presence was, he caused fear in his opponents. Paul was a man’s man. He was the little wirey guy that would stare down the biggest, ugliest thug without flinching and make him cry. Nevertheless, Paul served the church “with all humility and with tears”(Acts 20:19). He wasn’t just feared; he was deeply loved (20:36-38). So what makes a bold guy so meek? I think the very thing that made him bold made him humble. In think the key verse is Acts 20:24. He knew his purpose. Men who know their reason for existence are fiercely bold. They don’t need high approval ratings. Paul knew that he existed to testify to the gospel, period. Nothing less and nothing more. No additional value was attached to his life. In preaching Christ, his life fulfilled the only meaning that it had. To not preach Christ would save his life, but then it would be a life not worth living. This mentality results not only in boldness but also humility, for his value lies only in his message. Paul wasn’t concerned whether people loved Paul but whether they loved Christ. All the value went to Christ leaving nothing left over for Paul. The most humble people are always the most bold. Those who account no value to their life except that of their mission are always the most tenacious when it comes to their mission. And those who are mindful of their own value are the most cowardly when it comes to the mission.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
The World Needs To Know
Here are some videos from Abort73.com. If you can stomach it, I would also recommend watching this video. It is a tragedy that abortion has become a primarily political issue. It is so much more, and the only way to wake the world up to its evil is to show what it does.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Acts 19
Read Acts 19
Again we see the church growing at a rapid pace. In Acts 19:10 Luke states that “all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord, Jews and Greeks.” Is he serious? Of course, this “Asia” was a Roman province and not the same the present day continent, but still. In the span of 2 years, the message of Christ never heard before had been proclaimed throughout this province. How does this happen? Certainly there is a good deal of aggressive evangelism, friends sharing with their friends. However, Luke says very little about these things. Instead, he records that Paul taught the Scriptures and reasoned daily for two years in Ephesus (Acts 19:9), the capital of Asia. Secondly, Christians,and particularly Paul, became very well known for their extraordinary supernatural works (Acts 19:11-12). Thirdly, the church became renown for its opposition to the state cult and pagan worship (Acts 19:23-41).
Several things I observe from all this. First, Luke links the spread of the “word of the Lord” with the advancement of the church. It is not its public approval rating, which fluctuated quite drastically throughout the passage. In some ways the church was hated and in others it was loved. It was not Sunday’s attendance, though obviously that was growing. It was that the message of the gospel was being proclaimed and received. Good solid, biblical, Christ-centered teaching by Paul is at the epicenter of this Asian crusade. In other words, it is the power of the message that is transforming lives.
Secondly, Paul and the Christians reach the province of Asia by focusing upon its major metropolitan center of Ephesus. Such a strategy seems obvious, and I only mention it because we need more of this in our church today. We need people willing to go the cultural centers, the cities, and begin to proclaim the message of Christ.
Thirdly, early Christians were not known for their inclusion of other religions. They were highly exclusive, though lovingly so. Those who worshipped Christ refused to accept the dictates of Judaism or to participate in the worship of pagan gods like Artemis, and they were hated for it. They saw all those involved in such practices as needing conversion to Christ, and they strove for it with all their might. It is becoming more and more popular to say that those of other religions are not so very different from Christianity and that we should stop seeking their conversion. Instead, we should merely join hands with them in attempt to bring social aid to the world. While I’m all for helping the poor and starving and am willing to work with anyone to do it, such a view is clearly not the early Christian practice. The orthodox Christian stance has always been that there is one God, one Lord, one salvation, and it is all found in only one person, Jesus.
Again we see the church growing at a rapid pace. In Acts 19:10 Luke states that “all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord, Jews and Greeks.” Is he serious? Of course, this “Asia” was a Roman province and not the same the present day continent, but still. In the span of 2 years, the message of Christ never heard before had been proclaimed throughout this province. How does this happen? Certainly there is a good deal of aggressive evangelism, friends sharing with their friends. However, Luke says very little about these things. Instead, he records that Paul taught the Scriptures and reasoned daily for two years in Ephesus (Acts 19:9), the capital of Asia. Secondly, Christians,and particularly Paul, became very well known for their extraordinary supernatural works (Acts 19:11-12). Thirdly, the church became renown for its opposition to the state cult and pagan worship (Acts 19:23-41).
Several things I observe from all this. First, Luke links the spread of the “word of the Lord” with the advancement of the church. It is not its public approval rating, which fluctuated quite drastically throughout the passage. In some ways the church was hated and in others it was loved. It was not Sunday’s attendance, though obviously that was growing. It was that the message of the gospel was being proclaimed and received. Good solid, biblical, Christ-centered teaching by Paul is at the epicenter of this Asian crusade. In other words, it is the power of the message that is transforming lives.
Secondly, Paul and the Christians reach the province of Asia by focusing upon its major metropolitan center of Ephesus. Such a strategy seems obvious, and I only mention it because we need more of this in our church today. We need people willing to go the cultural centers, the cities, and begin to proclaim the message of Christ.
Thirdly, early Christians were not known for their inclusion of other religions. They were highly exclusive, though lovingly so. Those who worshipped Christ refused to accept the dictates of Judaism or to participate in the worship of pagan gods like Artemis, and they were hated for it. They saw all those involved in such practices as needing conversion to Christ, and they strove for it with all their might. It is becoming more and more popular to say that those of other religions are not so very different from Christianity and that we should stop seeking their conversion. Instead, we should merely join hands with them in attempt to bring social aid to the world. While I’m all for helping the poor and starving and am willing to work with anyone to do it, such a view is clearly not the early Christian practice. The orthodox Christian stance has always been that there is one God, one Lord, one salvation, and it is all found in only one person, Jesus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
