Another big-name newspaper editorial on self-esteem. As I've said before, I'm glad this is catching on.
And, for a quick preview on a future blog post, check out this article on the Death of Postmodernism. It's one of those rare moments when I can look around and say, "I told you so!" More on that later.
And it would only be fair to thank the editors over at The Gospel Coalition website for directing me to these pages. If you haven't seen what this group is about I highly recommend you check them out. They've had a few conferences now and all the media is available online.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Monday, August 15, 2011
On Under-programming Your Church
Here's a blog post I came across that I heartily agree with -- 10 reasons to under-program your church. Or rather, de-program your church. In other words, 10 reasons why maybe you should start removing some programs from your church even if you think they're good ideas.
Better than just removing programs to allow breathing space is to understand their inherent limitations. All good church programs are well meaning, and many of them can be very important and uplifting for those involved. The best programs are those that are organically grown from within the church as a worshipful response to the message of the Gospel from the pulpit. God certainly has, and continues to bless those efforts. But they are not his ordinary, prescribed means of grace.
The means of Grace refers to that which God has prescribed as a means of creating faith in the hearts of believers. It includes Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and of course, the written Word and proclamation of the Gospel. John Calvin wrote that there are three marks of a true church; the Gospel is preached, the sacraments are administered, and discipline is exercised.
If a church didn't have any special programs I'd be suspicious of whether it even cared for its congregation or its surrounding community. But many programs are nothing more than bells and whistles, pernicious ceremonies, and amusing but meaningless activities. When the ordinary seems boring our reaction is often to craft our own experiences under the guise of worship. We busy ourselves with the experiential and the practical. More is better, we tell ourselves. But at the heart of these is a lack of faith in God's power to save through the ordinary.
Churches are often known for this program or that, its dynamic worship, its energetic leadership. These can often impress us and might help to attract a crowd. But there is an enormous multi-billion dollar entertainment industry that does a far better job of amusement than any church could do. But this should not be our worry. The more critical question is whether a church remain steadfast to the calling God has ordained for it.
Programs are designed to meet particular needs within a church and its community, (sometimes just felt needs) but they are only supplemental. It is Christ who made the supper, we only serve what he made. God knows what he's doing.
Better than just removing programs to allow breathing space is to understand their inherent limitations. All good church programs are well meaning, and many of them can be very important and uplifting for those involved. The best programs are those that are organically grown from within the church as a worshipful response to the message of the Gospel from the pulpit. God certainly has, and continues to bless those efforts. But they are not his ordinary, prescribed means of grace.
The means of Grace refers to that which God has prescribed as a means of creating faith in the hearts of believers. It includes Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and of course, the written Word and proclamation of the Gospel. John Calvin wrote that there are three marks of a true church; the Gospel is preached, the sacraments are administered, and discipline is exercised.
If a church didn't have any special programs I'd be suspicious of whether it even cared for its congregation or its surrounding community. But many programs are nothing more than bells and whistles, pernicious ceremonies, and amusing but meaningless activities. When the ordinary seems boring our reaction is often to craft our own experiences under the guise of worship. We busy ourselves with the experiential and the practical. More is better, we tell ourselves. But at the heart of these is a lack of faith in God's power to save through the ordinary.
Churches are often known for this program or that, its dynamic worship, its energetic leadership. These can often impress us and might help to attract a crowd. But there is an enormous multi-billion dollar entertainment industry that does a far better job of amusement than any church could do. But this should not be our worry. The more critical question is whether a church remain steadfast to the calling God has ordained for it.
Programs are designed to meet particular needs within a church and its community, (sometimes just felt needs) but they are only supplemental. It is Christ who made the supper, we only serve what he made. God knows what he's doing.
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
On Machen and our view of God and Man
J. Gresham Machen is probably more important to modern Christianity than people realize. Apart from the fact that he's not a well-known name like Calvin, or Luther, or more contemporaries like Tim Keller or John Piper, his book "Christianity and Liberalism" is one of those prophetic books that seems to become more relevant as time progresses. Despite its relatively small size, it represents a "tour de force" against the ongoing influence of the mainline liberal churches.
The fundamental fault of the modern Church is that she is busily engaged in an absolutely impossible task--she is busily engaged in calling the righteous to repentance. Modern preachers are trying to bring men into the Church without requiring them to relinquish their pride; they are trying to help men avoid the conviction of sin. The preacher gets up into the pulpit, opens the Bible, and addresses the congregation somewhat as follows: "You people are very good," he says; "you respond to every appeal that looks toward the welfare of the community. Now we have in the Bible--especially in the life of Jesus--something so good that we believe it is good enough even for you good people." Such is modern preaching. It is heard every Sunday in thousands of pulpits. But it is entirely futile. Even our Lord did not call the righteous to repentance, and probably we shall be no more successful than He.
J. Gresham Machen - Chapter 2
In Chapter 2 Machen points out that the modern liberal preacher has a very different conception of God and man than that which is found in Scripture. What Machen has effectively done here is set you up for a proper understanding of the Law and Gospel. God reveals himself most specifically through the written word, and while our conception of God may be in part experiential, our experience isn't what has the last word on who we know God to be. In other words, experience is enough to grasp that there is a God, and that he is even a good and personal God. But experience alone cannot dictate our understanding of who God is. He has revealed himself to us through Scripture as well.
And we cannot have a proper understanding of ourselves apart from an understanding of God. One has to follow the other. Therefore, if our conception of God is contrary to that which is found in Scripture, so our view of man be inaccurate. We will inevitably make ourselves look better than we are.
Our understanding of who God is and who we are are summed up in Doctrinal terms. In other words, we need good Doctrine.
The word doctrine these days often conjures up feelings of old, boring, dry, "dead orthodoxy." The phrase "dead orthodoxy" is, in my opinion, a contradiction in terms and more of a perception than anything possibly true. But where "doctrine" is dismissed it is invariably replaced with a heap of exhortations which are powerless to save and burdensome to those who try to obey.
Hence the conclusion of Machen. A wrong view of God (ignorance of Biblical doctrine) leads to a view of man that presupposed the inherent goodness of man, which then reduces the task of the preacher to calling his congregation to mere good deeds. It does not create a repentant heart, and certainly doesn't lead to holiness.
Most importantly, it removes the Gospel, which has the power to save...
The fundamental fault of the modern Church is that she is busily engaged in an absolutely impossible task--she is busily engaged in calling the righteous to repentance. Modern preachers are trying to bring men into the Church without requiring them to relinquish their pride; they are trying to help men avoid the conviction of sin. The preacher gets up into the pulpit, opens the Bible, and addresses the congregation somewhat as follows: "You people are very good," he says; "you respond to every appeal that looks toward the welfare of the community. Now we have in the Bible--especially in the life of Jesus--something so good that we believe it is good enough even for you good people." Such is modern preaching. It is heard every Sunday in thousands of pulpits. But it is entirely futile. Even our Lord did not call the righteous to repentance, and probably we shall be no more successful than He.
J. Gresham Machen - Chapter 2
In Chapter 2 Machen points out that the modern liberal preacher has a very different conception of God and man than that which is found in Scripture. What Machen has effectively done here is set you up for a proper understanding of the Law and Gospel. God reveals himself most specifically through the written word, and while our conception of God may be in part experiential, our experience isn't what has the last word on who we know God to be. In other words, experience is enough to grasp that there is a God, and that he is even a good and personal God. But experience alone cannot dictate our understanding of who God is. He has revealed himself to us through Scripture as well.
And we cannot have a proper understanding of ourselves apart from an understanding of God. One has to follow the other. Therefore, if our conception of God is contrary to that which is found in Scripture, so our view of man be inaccurate. We will inevitably make ourselves look better than we are.
Our understanding of who God is and who we are are summed up in Doctrinal terms. In other words, we need good Doctrine.
The word doctrine these days often conjures up feelings of old, boring, dry, "dead orthodoxy." The phrase "dead orthodoxy" is, in my opinion, a contradiction in terms and more of a perception than anything possibly true. But where "doctrine" is dismissed it is invariably replaced with a heap of exhortations which are powerless to save and burdensome to those who try to obey.
Hence the conclusion of Machen. A wrong view of God (ignorance of Biblical doctrine) leads to a view of man that presupposed the inherent goodness of man, which then reduces the task of the preacher to calling his congregation to mere good deeds. It does not create a repentant heart, and certainly doesn't lead to holiness.
Most importantly, it removes the Gospel, which has the power to save...
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
What is Ben Watching? - A Writer's Responsibility to Truth
By no means am I a professional writer. Writing isn't exactly something that comes naturally to me. It often feels about as cumbersome as reading, which I do slowly and laboriously. This is why I admire those prolific writers out there, and I'm thankful it's them and not myself who are able to write so many wonderful books. But even if I'm not gifted in writing, I really don't believe that just "blogging" gives me an excuse to write poorly.
Forgive me for possibly sounding elitist but I think writing is something we should take seriously. There's a certain degree of credibility that comes from writing well, but more importantly, I believe, is that we should write truthfully. In other words, instead of miring the literary world (and that includes the internet) with clumsy, opinionated, and feckless musings I would hope that what we read is actually worth our time. For goodness sake, I think your own dignity is at stake.
How refreshing, then, to come upon this video. I've never heard of either of these two gentlemen, but I couldn't help but respect what the author being interviewed has to say.
Clumsy, opinionated, and feckless musing:
For the record, 10 years ago I would probably never have said anything like this. But 10 years ago I was still taking grammar and English lessons, which, to be honest, I'm still not terribly interested in. Although some of my American friends may criticize me for being a "grammar nazi." Even that's only because American vernacular has terrible grammar by nature. Seriously, you should know better. I digress.
The point is, Truth is something we should all take seriously. If you take Truth seriously it will invariably show up in your writings, even if you do have poor grammar and spelling. I find those that take Truth seriously end up writing less about themselves, and more about what is. They understand that Truth is something outside of themselves, so they're less inclined to write personal opinion. Yet Truth relates to us in such deep and profound ways it's nevertheless personal anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)