Biblical Hermeneutics and Female Leadership in the Church

Note: This post was a paper originally written in 1995, when our church was dealing with the issue of women pastors and women teaching over men in the Baptist General Conference. We left the BGC many years ago, but some have still found this paper to be helpful. I hope the readers of this blog may find it helpful as well.

Most of us are aware of the ongoing debate among many evangelicals today over the nature of women's roles in the church, particularly with regard to the question of whether or not women may be included in leadership positions. Although I have only just scratched the surface in my own study, upon examination of some of the literature representing the various viewpoints, it wasn't long before I discovered the difficult and sometimes complex issues involved. There are many hard questions which need to be answered by evangelical Christians concerning these issues, especially in the face of much cultural, social and sometimes political pressure. I do not believe, however, that we may responsibly avoid clearly answering such questions, especially in the interest of the full participation of gifted women in the body of Christ. In the end, though, there is only one basic question which has to be answered: “What does the Bible teach about the role of women in the church?”

It is because we are most interested in discerning the Biblical teaching on the matter that the real debate among evangelical Christians is a hermeneutical one. And, as I see it, it really comes down to several key questions regarding the method of interpretation of certain kinds of Biblical data. I shall seek to highlight these questions in the following pages through an overview and brief examination of some of the various pertinent Biblical texts. I shall first examine as a group those Biblical texts which seem to view favorably women in positions of authority and teaching over men. This shall be followed by a brief discussion in turn of 1 Tim. 2:11-12 and Galatians 3:28.

There are a number of texts which are often cited as indicating either that women were in positions of leadership, and possibly teaching, over men or that they had gifts which would enable them to fulfill these kinds of functions and should therefore not be denied them. A rather long list of these kinds of texts is sometimes presented by those who would argue for women's ordination, or at least for some kind of active leadership teaching role for women in the church. For example, John Stott argues that “a strong prima facie biblical case can be made for active female leadership in the church, including a teaching ministry” (Decisive Issues 275). He then goes on to cite numerous Biblical examples, which include: Hulda (2 Kings 22:11 ff); Miriam (Exodus 15:20); Deborah (Judges 4-5); Phillip's four daughters (Acts 21:9); women who prayed and prophesied at Corinth (1 Cor. 11:5); Priscilla (Acts 18:26); and Junias (Rom. 16:17). In addition, Stott observes:

Paul seems to have had women helpers in his entourage, as Jesus had had in his. It is impressive to see the number of women he mentions in his letters. Euodia and Syntyche in Philippi he describes as “fellow-workers” (a word he also applied to men like Timothy and Titus), who had “contended” at his side “in the case of the gospel.” And in Romans 16 he refers appreciatively to eight women. He begins by commending “our sister Phoebe, a servant (or perhaps 'deacon') of the church in Cenchrea,” who had been “a great help to many people” including Paul himself, and then sends greetings (among others) to Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa and Persis, all of whom, he says, have worked “hard” or “very hard” in the Lord's service. (275- 276)

It is this kind of evidence which Richard and Catherine Clark Kroeger, in their recent book, I Suffer Not a Woman, believe forces us to seek a new interpretation of 1 Tim. 2:11-12, which states that a woman should “quietly receive instructions with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (NASB). The Kroegers lament that “many evangelicals view all Biblical passages about the role and ministry of women through the lens of 1 Tim. 2:12. It becomes the key verse on women, the one on which all others turn” (12). Here I believe the Kroegers have pin-pointed a crucial hermeneutical question. Should the Biblical passages included in Stott's prima facie argument cause us to limit in some way the 1 Tim. 2:12 passage, or should we allow the apparently universal and unambiguous statement of 1 Tim. 2:12 to control our understanding of the kinds of texts which Stott lists? This is not an easy question to answer, and it should be pointed out up front that there are a number of prominent evangelicals who agree with the Kroegers and Stott. For example, Millard J. Erickson, in his Christian Theology, lists basically the same Pauline passages as Stott and the Kroegers and agrees that “these indications of Paul's conception of the usefulness of women in ministering modify those passages where he seems to restrict their activities. The restrictive passages, then, should be seen as relating to particular local situations (e.g., 1 Cor. 14:33-36)” (549).

It must be admitted that on the surface this argument does seem to be compelling, and it should not be dismissed lightly, especially with advocates the like of Stott and Erickson. Nevertheless, if 1 Tim. 2:12 is in its own context clearly universally applicable for the church in all ages, then I do not believe that the above argument is convincing. I do not see how a clear, didactic utterance intended to set forth the respective functions of men and women regarding authority and teaching in the church could be overruled by a series of texts such as those put forth by Stott. For example, such historical narrative texts as those concerning Miriam (Exodus 15:21-22) and Deborah (Judges 4-5) simply are not intended to teach the correct role of women in the New Testament church, and neither of them imply in any way a universal leadership and teaching role for women in all ages. For instance, though we know that Miriam was a prophetess, there is no real evidence that she was in a specific position of authority over men. And even if there were such evidence, there is no textual evidence at all that such a thing should be considered as normative for Israel, let alone the New Testament church. Also, when one considers the example of Deborah, who was unquestionably in a position of leadership and authority over men, it is again not at all clear in the text that this was to be regarded in any way as a norm. In fact, I would contend that there is clear evidence to the contrary. It should be noticed, for instance, that in the beginning of the book the author describes a repeated cycle in which Israel would fall into sin, then they would be overwhelmed by their enemies as a judgment from God, then the people would repent and cry out to God for help, then then He would raise up a judge who would bring deliverance from their enemies, and then the people would fall into sin and and start the cycle all over again (2:11-19). In this passage we are twice told that “the LORD raised up judges” (vs. 16, 18). But later in the account of Deborah, the author of Judges is sure to point out that “the sons of Israel came up to her for judgment” (Judges 4:5, italics mine). Although God made Deborah a prophetess, it was the people who sought to make her a judge. It is no wonder, then, that when Barak later refused to go into battle without her, Deborah chided him with the words, “I will surely go with you; nevertheless there will be no glory for you in the journey you are taking, for the LORD will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman” (4:9). And we should also remember that Judges is a book written not only to tell about that period of Israel's history, but also to show how decadent and abnormal it was! So, rather than seeing Deborah as an example of God's intention for women in every age, one may instead take it as just another indictment against a wicked nation who continually refused to do things God's way. So, again, if 1 Tim. 2:12 is a prescriptive passage intended to be universally binding in all ages, then such arguments from descriptive historical narrative passages do not seem to me to be valid.

But what about Acts 18:26 where Priscilla and Aquilla are said to have “explained” to Apollos “the way of God more accurately?” Well, as Stott himself points out, this is an instance of informal and private teaching rather than official and public (276), and it does not seem to me that this kind of private “team-teaching” (if it may be called that) on the part of married couples is in view in 1 Tim. 2:12, which does appear to be referring to public gatherings. In fact, the observation that the word for “explained” in Acts 18:26 is ektithemi (rather than didasko as in 1 Tim. 2:12) may serve to further informalize the passage, distancing it even more from the context of 1 Tim 2.

Lastly, in those passages where Paul commends women as fellow laborers in the gospel (e.g. Phil. 4:2-3), or in the case of Phoebe who is commended as a “servant of the church,” there is no indication that any of these women were in positions of authority or of teaching over men.

To summarize thus far, I do not believe it hermeneutically valid to set aside a clear passage of Scripture on the basis of ambiguous or exceptional texts, especially when none of these texts has as its intent instruction concerning the respective roles of men and women in the church. However, all that I have said up to this point assumes that 1 Tim. 2:11-12, in particular, may only be interpreted legitimately as laying down a universal norm for the church in all ages. I shall now seek, then, to demonstrate the validity of this interpretation.

As briefly noted above, 1 Tim. 2:11-12 reads, “Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.” The question we must answer is, “Is this text to be taken as universally binding on the church in all ages, or may we see it as limited to a specific situation Paul is addressing at the church in Ephesus?” My answer is that we may not see it as strictly applicable only to that occasion unless there is Biblical warrant to do so. D.A. Carson, in his Exegetical Fallacies, points out the error of taking any other position. He notes that Philip B. Payne

argues that 1 Tim. 2:11-15 is directed toward a local abuse, and therefore that its teaching should not be universally applied. The reasoning may be analyzed thus:

Teaching occasioned by a local situation is not universally applicable.
The teaching in question is occasioned by a local situation.
Therefore the teaching in question is not universally applicable.

In this instance, the form of the argument is valid, but the first premise is too generalized to be believable. In one sense, all the New Testament documents are “occasional”; so unless one enunciates more clearly just what features are no longer binding . . . we shall be left with the uncomfortable conclusion that nothing in the New Testament is binding on the consciences of modern believers. (101)

I agree with Carson's conclusion that we must enunciate more clearly a means of determining what is to be considered normative and what is not. I believe that William Larkin has ably done just that in his recent – and underappreciated – work, Culture and Biblical Hermeneutics: Interpreting and Applying the Authoritative Word in a Relativistic Age. Larkin describes four ways for determining whether or not a specific teaching of Scripture may be considered normative. Any teaching must be considered normative unless it meets one of the following criteria:

(1) Indirect application is called for if the direct recipient of the teaching is limited by the immediate context.

(2) Presentation of specific historical or cultural conditions for obedience to the command or reception of a promise indicates that a limited application was intended.

(3) A limited cultural rationale shows that the writer intended to limit the extent of

application.

(4) The broader context of subsequent revelation can explicitly set aside previous revelation. (354-456)

These criteria I believe to be solid hermeneutical principles which may be applied to the text of 1 Tim. 2:11-12. And, when this is done, we find not only that it does not meet any of these four criteria, but that there is in fact a rationale given by Paul that requires that these verses be taken as universally binding in all ages. Paul's rationale for the command is found in the next verse in the assertion, “For it was Adam that was first created and then Eve” (vs. 13). Thus Paul appeals to the creation order, and one can get no more universally binding than that! Others may argue at this point, however, that Larkin's basic assumption, being that “all biblical teaching – commands, promises, and statements of truth – is normative unless Scripture explicitly indicates otherwise” (354), is misguided. One such person would be Millard Erickson who, after listing a number of problems associated with failing to appropriately contemporize Biblical teaching, asserts that “in actuality, we should be diligent in attempting to determine the underlying intent of the passage or the signification within the signification, even where none of these problems is evident. Otherwise, we are simply assuming that the Bible is speaking in an absolute or universal fashion whenever we do not have reason to do otherwise” (Evangelical Interpretation, 58-59). Perhaps, then, we should briefly examine Erickson's suggested approach to see how 1 Tim. 2:11-12 would fair given his own assumption, which seems to be that we should not see the Bible as speaking universally unless we have explicit indication to do so.

In his Christian Theology, in a chapter entitled “Contemporizing the Christian Message,” Erickson lists the following five “criteria of permanence:”

(1) Constancy across cultures.

(2) Universal setting.

(3) A recognized permanent factor as a base.

(4) Indissoluble link with an experience regarded as essential.

(5) Final position within progressive revelation. (120-124)

At least four of these criteria (1, 2, 3 and 5) appear to be very solid and helpful principles to aid us in our understanding of what is to be considered normative in Scripture. And, after applying these criteria to 1 Tim. 2:11-12, we once again discover that Paul's prohibition concerning women is intended as a universal norm for the church in all ages. For example, Paul gives “a recognized permanent factor as a base” for his command, namely that it is based on God's intention in the creation order (1 Tim. 2:13).

We have thus seen so far that 1 Tim. 2:11-12 must be taken as normative for the church universally and in all ages, even after having applied “criteria of permanence” from opposite ends of the evangelical spectrum concerning this issue. And we have further seen that this position must be taken because Paul's rationale for the command concerning women is based upon the creation order. There are those, however, who would concede this point but would argue that Paul gives this rationale merely to establish the issue of authority, and he only forbids women to teach over men in situations where authority is being usurped over them. Stott, for example, notes that:

Paul expresses two antitheses, the first between to “learn in quietness” or “be silent” and “to teach,” and the second between “full submission” and “authority.” The latter is the substantial point, confirms Paul's constant teaching about female submission to male headship, and is firmly rooted in the biblical account of creation (“for Adam was formed first, then Eve”). But the other instruction (the requirement of silence and the prohibition of teaching) . . . seems to be an expression of the authority-submission syndrome, rather than an addition to it. (277)

Stott thus concludes “that there are situations in which it is entirely proper for women to teach, and to teach men, provided that in so doing they are not usurping an improper authority over them” (278). This reasoning, however, is simply not valid. I agree that women teaching over men is an expression of authority over them, but I see no good reason in the text for limiting Paul's rationale only to certain situations of teaching over men and not to others. That is, there is no evidence from the text that Paul has in view here any limitation such as Stott supposes. If it is wrong for women to have authority over men for the reason Paul gives, and if teaching over men by definition expresses this kind of authority, then teaching over men is wrong. Not only this, but when Paul gives the reason “for Adam was first created, and then Eve,” he is giving an explanation for the clause “I do not allow.” And he expressly says that he neither allows women to teach nor to usurp authority over men. There are actually two separate prohibitions, and I see no way that Paul's rationale does not extend to both of them. In addition, George Knight points out that “Some have suggested that Paul is only ruling out teaching or exercise of authority apart from a man's oversight, or just a certain type of authoritative teaching. The insistence here on silence seems to rule out all these solutions” (Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles 142). Gordon Fee also notes with regard to the admonition for women to keep silent that “Since this is the first thing said about women here in verse 11, and the last thing said in verse 12, it seems clear that the emphasis lies here” (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus 35). So, contra Stott, it is in fact the prohibition against teaching which seems to be the “substantial point.” Let us not think, however, that this means that women must always be silent, for as George Knight goes on to point out concerning the command of silence, “The clause as a whole describes the status of a woman not in relation to every aspect of the gathered assembly . . . but specifically in respect to that with which it is contrasted, i.e., teaching (and the exercise of authority)” (142).

In summary, there is simply no valid reason for seeing 1 Tim. 2:11-12 as anything other than a universally normative prescription for the church for all ages. Neither is there any valid reason in the text for limiting this only to the command that women should have no authority over men and not to the command that women should not teach over men as well.

But, someone may ask, what about Paul's statement in Galatians 3:28 that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male or female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus?” Does this text not rule out such a distinction between male and female as we have seen in 1 Timothy? The answer is no, it does not. Paul is not obliterating role distinctions based upon sex, he is talking about a person's spiritual standing before God which is not determined by whether one is a Jew or a Greek, a slave or a free man, a male or a female. What Paul is doing is destroying class distinctions made by those to whom he is writing insofar as a person's justification before God is concerned. In those days, Jews often had such a low view of Greeks, masters often had such a low view of slaves, and men often had such a low view of women, that Paul needed to assure them that God does not show this kind of partiality in bestowing salvation. So, though there is equality in their spiritual standing before God, there are still distinct roles which men and women must fulfill because of their sex. 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is talking about these kinds of roles and is not in any way implying that men are better than women or that women are in any way to be thought of as inferior beings.

I shall conclude as I began, with a statement of the difficult and sometimes complex nature of the issues surrounding the roles of men and women in the church, and particularly regarding the question of female leadership and teaching over men. I do not pretend to have answered by any means all of the questions which need to be answered, but I have tried to point out what I believe the foundational and most crucial issues are that need to be faced by evangelical Christians. These issues involve the way in which we interpret Scripture and apply it in a culture so far removed from that of its authors. I have tried to sort through and highlight some of the problems and possible solutions to these questions. This has led me to a position which is becoming increasingly less popular, but which I believe to be Biblical. I therefore must hold that women should neither be ordained to elder or pastoral offices in the church, nor should they be in situations in which they are teaching over men. And although there are undoubtedly still many difficulties left unresolved, I would take this at least to include both preaching in such public gatherings as Sunday morning worship and teaching in such public gatherings as Sunday school or discipleship groups.

Works Cited

Carson, D.A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1993.

---- Evangelical Interpretation: Perspectives on Hermeneutical Issues. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1986.

Fee, Gordon 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1984.

Knight, George Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1992.

Kroeger, Richard Clark & Kroeger, Catherine Clark I Suffer Not a Woman. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992.

Larkin, William J. Culture and Biblical Hermeneutics: Interpreting and Applying the Authoritative Word in a Relativistic Age. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988.

Stott, John Decisive Issues Facing Christians Today. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1990.

John Piper on MacArthur, Driscoll, and the Song of Solomon

Yesterday Jonathan Christman posted the above audio at his blog, where he has been tracking the debate that has arisen regardng appropriate speech for pastors. He reports that the audio is from the 2009 Basics Conference that took place on May 11-13 at Parkside Church in Cleveland, Ohio. In it, John declares his agreement with MacArthur with regard to the proper interpretation of the Song of Solomn and what makes for appropriate speech for pastors, but he disagrees with MacAthur's apparent view that such problems should automatically disqualify Driscoll from pastoral ministry.

For Mother's Day: How Motherhood Reflects the Character and Love of God

Note: The following is a basic teaching outline for a Mother's Day message. I hope the blog's readers find it helpful.

As I was thinking about the theme for today's teaching, I came across this helpful description of of the origin of Mother's Day:

Anna M. Jarvis (1864-1948) first suggested the national observance of an annual day honoring all mothers because she had loved her own mother so dearly. At a memorial service for her mother on May 10, 1908, Miss Jarvis gave a carnation (her mother's favorite flower) to each person who attended. Within the next few years, the idea of a day to honor mothers gained popularity, and Mother's Day was observed in a number of large cities in the U.S.

On May 9, 1914, by an act of Congress, President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed the second Sunday in May as Mother's Day. He established the day as a time for “public expression of our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” (Pulpit Helps, May, 1991, as cited at Bible.org Sermon Illustrations)

I think it is proper that we should show appreciation for our own mothers as well as for the role of motherhood itself. And it is especially fitting that we honor godly mothers, for, as Abraham Lincoln was known to have said, “No man is poor who has had a godly mother."

But I can think of no better way to honor the mothers in our midst than to show how motherhood at its best reveals the character and love of God. This is why a loving mother is sometimes used in the Bible as a metaphor to describe God's love for us. And today I would like to take a look at a few passages where this may be seen.

But before we look at the first passage, I want to qualify what I am trying to say. I am not saying that we should refer to God by the title Mother. We should always and only refer to Him as Father and in masculine terms, which is the consistent testimony of Scripture. However, as I have said already, Scripture does use the analogy of a mother's love to picture the love of God in several places, so it is appropriate that we learn from this. So, with this caveat in place, let's consider first Isaiah 66:10-13. In this passage God likens Jerusalem to a mother, and I suspect this is where Paul may have gotten the idea when he referred in Galatians 4:26 to the heavenly Jerusalem as “the mother of us all.” However, notice as you read the passage that it isn't until verse 13 that we see that it is really God who will comfort His people as a mother comforts her children.

NKJ Isaiah 66:10-13 “Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all you who love her; rejoice for joy with her, all you who mourn for her; 11 that you may feed and be satisfied with the consolation of her bosom, that you may drink deeply and be delighted with the abundance of her glory.” 12 For thus says the LORD: “Behold, I will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream. Then you shall feed; on her sides shall you be carried, and be dandled on her knees. 13 As one whom his mother comforts, so I will comfort you; and you shall be comforted in Jerusalem.”

So, it is clear that it is really God that is metaphorically being described here as a mother who nurtures and comforts her child. But how is it that He will so comfort us? There are at least three ways in which we are told that His treatment of us is like that of a caring and nurturing mother:

1) Like a mother God provides for us – This is seen in the repeated description of the way that the mother nurtures her child (vss. 11-12a, “feed and be satisfied” – “drink” – “feed”).

2) Like a mother God protects us – This is seen in the way that the mother is described as carrying her child on her side (vs.12b, “on her sides you shall be carried” ). Just as a child is kept safe by his mother carrying him, so we are gently carried along by the Lord.

3) Like a mother God delights in us – This can be seen in the reference to the way the mother gently and joyfully bounces her child on her knees (vs.12c, “dandled on her knees”). The Hebrew word translated dandled [shaa] actually means “delight in,” but the English word dandle is probably a good translation and means “to move (as a baby) up and down in one's arms or on one's knee in affectionate play” (Merriam Webster Online Dictionary). The picture us one of joyfulness, gentleness, and caring.

What a marvelous analogy the Lord uses to help us to see His affection for us as His children! But there is more.

NKJ Psalm 131:1-3 LORD, my heart is not haughty, nor my eyes lofty. Neither do I concern myself with great matters, nor with things too profound for me. 2 Surely I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with his mother; like a weaned child is my soul within me. 3 O Israel, hope in the LORD from this time forth and forever.

Observe in verse 2 how David describes his relationship with God as being “like a weaned child with his mother.” He communicates a childlike trust in the Lord that doesn't need to have all the answers to every difficult question because it relies completely on the care and love of God. We can trust in God without question, just as a small child trusts his mother. This kind of faith trusts fully in God's promise that He will never leave us or forsake us (Heb. 13:5). And this leads to the next passage.

NKJ Isaiah 49:14-15 But Zion said, “The LORD has forsaken me, and my Lord has forgotten me.” 15 Can a woman forget her nursing child, and not have compassion on the son of her womb? Surely they may forget, yet I will not forget you.

Just as a mother remembers her nursing child, so God will always remember us. And He doesn't just remember us, but He remembers us with compassion toward us in His heart, just as a mother is moved by compassion to feed her crying child.

Most of us would probably find it very hard to imagine how a mother could ever forget or fail to be compassionate toward her child. But we should find it even more difficult to believe that God could ever forget us!

But what if – as the LORD says in verse 15 – a mother should forget her child? What if that has happened to some of us? What if some of us have not had such a good mother and therefore struggle to grasp the kind of love being described here? For example, some of us may have been abused or abandoned by our mothers. Well, this leads to another passage I would like to bring to your attention.

NKJ Psalm 27:7-10 Hear, O LORD, when I cry with my voice! Have mercy also upon me, and answer me. 8 When You said, “Seek My face,” my heart said to You, “Your face, LORD, I will seek.” 9 Do not hide Your face from me; do not turn Your servant away in anger; you have been my help; do not leave me nor forsake me, O God of my salvation. 10 When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take care of me [ESV, “take me in”].

Here David contemplates the possibility that even his own father and mother may abandon him, but he knows that God will never forget His children! God will take us in and take care of us even if our parents abandon us. He will be to us all that a mother or father should be – and so much more!

In fact, He will even give us other people in the Church to replace our lost parents, as Jesus promised His disciples:

NKJ Mark 10:28-30 Then Peter began to say to Him, “See, we have left all and followed You.” 29 So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's, 30 who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time -- houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions -- and in the age to come, eternal life.” (Italics mine.)

This year I definitely want all of you to honor your mother. As the Fifth Commandment says, “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12a).

But even more important than that, I encourage you to take time to praise God and thank Him for the way in which godly motherhood pictures His tender love and care for us. And, of course, this is what any godly mother would want you to do as well!

The Importance of the Ascension of Christ

Recently I was reading John Calvin's discussion of the ascension of Jesus in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. I was struck by his treatment of the "benefits imparted to our faith by Christ's ascension," in which he makes the following observations:

From this doctrine faith derives manifold advantages. First, it perceives that the Lord, by his ascension to heaven, has opened up the access to the heavenly kingdom, which Adam had shut. For having entered it in our flesh, as it were in our name, it follows, as the Apostle says, that we are in a manner now seated in heavenly places, not entertaining a mere hope of heaven, but possessing it in our head.

Secondly, faith perceives that his seat beside the Father is not without great advantage to us. Having entered the temple not made with hands, he constantly appears as our advocate and intercessor in the presence of the Father; directs attention to his own righteousness, so as to turn it away from our sins; so reconciles him to us, as by his intercession to pave for us a way of access to his throne, presenting it to miserable sinners, to whom it would otherwise be an object of dread, as replete with grace and mercy.

Thirdly, it discerns his power, on which depend our strength, might, resources, and triumph over hell, “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive,” (Eph. 4:8). Spoiling his foes, he gave gifts to his people, and daily loads them with spiritual riches. He thus occupies his exalted seat, that thence transferring his virtue unto us, he may quicken us to spiritual life, sanctify us by his Spirit, and adorn his Church with various graces, by his protection preserve it safe from all harm, and by the strength of his hand curb the enemies raging against his cross and our salvation; in fine, that he may possess all power in heaven and earth, until he have utterly routed all his foes, who are also ours and completed the structure of his Church. Such is the true nature of the kingdom, such the power which the Father has conferred upon him, until he arrive to complete the last act by judging the quick and the dead. (2.2.16)

I was glad to see Calvin's emphasis upon the ascension, and I was reminded of a teaching I gave several years ago as I began to realize how little Christians think about or emphasize the ascension today. I thought it might be good, then, to share this teaching here. What follows is my own teaching outline:

Teaching Outline on the Ascension of Christ

Introduction: Ask for contribution from the congregation to answer the question: “What are the most significant events of Jesus' life or aspects of His work for us?” Answers will do doubt include such things as His virgin birth, sinless life, miracles, crucifixion, and resurrection.

Sadly, I have yet to hear anyone mention the ascension when I ask this question. But what about His ascension? What can we learn from it, and why do we need to know about it?

Many Christians have not given Jesus' ascension much thought, except, perhaps, as a part of a discussion of His return – which we will see is indeed important. But there are a number of things the Bible has to say about why Jesus ascended into Heaven. In fact, we will examine nine reasons for His ascension.

1. Jesus ascended to demonstrate the manner in which He would return.

NKJ Acts 1:9-11 “Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, 'Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.'”

Application: This passage is the primary reason why Christians have consistently affirmed the visible, bodily return of Christ in the future. We do not have to worry that He might have come back already and we somehow missed it! He was seen going into heaven, and He will be seen coming back to earth!

2. Jesus ascended to complete His exaltation.

NKJ Acts 2:33-36 “Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. 34 For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself: 'The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, 35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”' 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

NKJ Acts 5:31 “Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.”

NKJ Philippians 2:9-11 “Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

NKJ 1 Timothy 3:16 “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory.”

Application: We should never cease to praise Jesus as our risen and ascended Lord. We should seek to praise and honor Him as Lord in all that we do. And we should remember to include this as part of the Gospel message in our witness to others just as the Apostles did. When you tell others about Jesus, do you ever emphasize His exaltation at the Father's right hand? Do you stress His exalted status as Lord over all creation?

3. Jesus ascended to begin His reign in Heaven.

NKJ Ephesians 1:20-23 “... which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come. 22 And He put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.”

NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:25 “For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.”

NKJ 1 Peter 3:22 “...who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.”

Application: Many of us rightly think of Jesus as one day returning to establish His Kingdom, but we should also remember that He is already reigning over all things. He is already the King to whom every knee ought to bow, and our allegiance to Him takes precedence over all other allegiances.

4. Jesus ascended to demonstrate the completion of His sacrificial work.

NKJ Hebrews 1:1-3 “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high....”

NKJ Hebrews 10:11-12 “And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God....”

NKJ Hebrews 12:2 “....looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

Application: Jesus' work was finished, and there was nothing left to be done in order to accomplish forgiveness for our sins, so – unlike the Levitical priests – He sat down. If He needed to do nothing more for us in His atoning work, then we can certainly do nothing to add to what He has done! We can fully place our trust in what He has done for us, confident that there is nothing left to do!

5. Jesus ascended in order to prepare a place for us.

NKJ John 14:1-3 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.”

Illustration: When we have guests coming, we get ready for them in advance, especially when we are glad to have them coming to stay with us. And we aren't going to spend all that time getting ready for the visit only to forget to pick our guest up at the airport!

Application: Jesus is already making preparation for the eternity we will spend with Him in Heaven! What a tremendous encouragement for us all. And if He is working to prepare this place for us, then we know He is doing it for a reason, to come for us and take us home with Him.

6. Jesus ascended in order to send the Holy Spirit to us.

NKJ John 14:16-18 “And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever -- 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.”

Application: The Holy Spirit enables us to experience the presence of Jesus in our lives at all times.

NKJ John 16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.”

Jesus doesn't say why He must go for the Spirit to come. It was apparently a part of a plan that must be followed.

Application: The Holy Spirit has come to us in a way that He would not have come if Jesus had not ascended back to Heaven. And His empowering presence is a blessing that we wouldn't have known aside from Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension.

7. Jesus ascended in order to continue His intercession for us at the Father's right hand.

NKJ Romans 8:34 “Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.”

NKJ Hebrews 7:25 “Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.”

Application: It is such an encouragement to know that Jesus went to bend the Father's ear, so to speak, on our behalf! He is right there, in the most exalted place, nearest to the Father, interceding for us constantly.

8. Jesus ascended in order to demonstrate His victory.

NKJ Ephesians 4:8 “Therefore He says: 'When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men'.”

Quote: John Gill has aptly commented on this passage:

[This] is expressive of Christ's conquests and triumph over sin, Satan, the world, death, and the grave; and indeed, every spiritual enemy of his and his people, especially the devil, who leads men captive at his will, and is therefore called captivity, and his principalities and powers, whom Christ has spoiled and triumphed over; the allusion is to the public triumphs of the Romans, in which captives were led in chains, and exposed to open view. (Exposition of the Entire Bible, e-Sword)

The victory that He demonstrated through His ascension was the victory He wrought upon the cross:

NKJ Colossians 2:13-15 “And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.”

Application: What an encouragement that Jesus did not ascend without first winning the decisive battle over all our enemies! His ascension proves that the victory is ours through His work and power.

9. Jesus ascended in order to give gifts to the Church.

NKJ Ephesians 4:8-13 “Therefore He says: 'When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men.' 9 (Now this, 'He ascended' -- what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.) 11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ....”

Application: Not only did Jesus leave us the Holy Spirit (as we saw earlier), but He also made sure that He gave us the leaders and the teachers we will need – and that the Holy Spirit will use – to help us achieve maturity as Christians and to serve Him in the Church and in the world. Do you often think of your pastor-teachers, for example, as gifts from Jesus to you? Do you thank Him for these gifts?

Conclusion: Will you all think about the ascension of Jesus the next time you are pondering the most important events in His life or the most important aspects of His saving work on our behalf? Will you remember to worship Him as your risen and ascended Lord, as you ought to do? Will you remember to speak of His exalted status as the ascended Lord when you tell others about Him?

I hope the blog's readers find this brief teaching outline helpful, not only in reminding themselves of the importance of Jesus' ascension, but also as an aid to help remind others as well.

Soli Deo gloria!

The Importance of Books for the Pastor

Ligon Duncan spoke at the Gospel Coalition conference this morning on 2 Timothy 4:6-22. As he was expositing the text, he mentioned what he called a classic sermon by Charles Spurgeon on verse 13, in which Paul admonishes Timothy to "bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come-- and the books, especially the parchments." Ligon then went on the quote the sermon at some length, and I was so taken by this quote (as also was Ligon, obviously) that I wanted to share it with you all. Although Spurgeon's remarks are aimed primarily at pastors, I am sure most of us will agree with Spurgeon that all of God's people also have this same need. So, without further ado, from the sermon entitled Paul—His Cloak and His Books:

We do not know what the books were about, and we can only form some guess as to what the parchments were. Paul had a few books which were left, perhaps wrapped up in the cloak, and Timothy was to be careful to bring them. Even an apostle must read. Some of our very ultra Calvinistic brethren think that a minister who reads books and studies his sermon must be a very deplorable specimen of a preacher. A man who comes up into the pulpit, professes to take his text on the spot, and talks any quantity of nonsense, is the idol of many. If he will speak without premeditation, or pretend to do so, and never produce what they call a dish of dead men's brains—oh! that is the preacher. How rebuked are they by the apostle! He is inspired, and yet he wants books! He has been preaching at least for thirty years, and yet he wants books! He had seen the Lord, and yet he wants books! He had had a wider experience than most men, and yet he wants books! He had been caught up into the third heaven, and had heard things which it was unlawful for a men to utter, yet he wants books! He had written the major part of the New Testament, and yet he wants books! The apostle says to Timothy and so he says to every preacher, "Give thyself unto reading." The man who never reads will never be read; he who never quotes will never be quoted. He who will not use the thoughts of other men's brains, proves that he has no brains of his own. Brethren, what is true of ministers is true of all our people. You need to read. Renounce as much as you will all light literature, but study as much as possible sound theological works, especially the Puritanic writers, and expositions of the Bible. We are quite persuaded that the very best way for you to be spending your leisure, is to be either reading or praying. You may get much instruction from books which afterwards you may use as a true weapon in your Lord and Master's service. Paul cries, "Bring the books"—join in the cry.

Sadly, reading has fallen on hard times these days, as Ligon noted in his own sermon. This is why we need Spurgeon's warning even more in our own day. You see, we tend to acclimate ourselves to being spoon fed information in entertaining ways, training ourselves to be impatient with the length and attention required by reading books. But since we are a people of the Bible - the book inspired by God - then we all need go against the cultural current and train ourselves to be readers again. This may mean that we need to turn off the television more. It may mean we need to listen to the radio less. It may mean that we need to spend less time on the internet, where we learn to read only minutes at time. But aren't these small sacrifices to make in order to help ourselves become better able to read longer and more attentively and so become more competent readers of God's Word?

John MacArthur on the "Rape of Solomon's Song"

I have long been impressed by John MacArthur's courage and care in taking a stand on important issues confronting the Church. And I continue to be impressed and encouraged by his recent willingness to address the concerns many of us have with respect to the obscene language that is being used all too often in pulpits these days. In this case, John was prompted to address a particular example of this problem, which is a sermon that Mark Driscoll preached on the Song of Solomon.

The audio of the sermon may be found here, but a transcript of selected problem portions of the sermon may be found here. (Warning: There is sexually explicit language in both the audio and the transcript linked here.)

John has addressed his concerns this week in a four part series of blog articles entitled "The Rape of Solomon's Song," which were posted at the Grace to You website. Here are the links to each of the four parts:

Part One (Posted Tuesday, Apr 14, 2009)

Part Two (Posted Wednesday, Apr 15, 2009)

Part Three (Posted Thursday, Apr 16, 2009)

Part Four (Posted Friday, Apr 17, 2009)

This is an issue and a series that I think it important for this blog's readers to be aware of. For more information addressing the Biblical response to such matters, see also my earlier post providing the videos of Phil Johnson's message entitled "Sound Doctrine; Sound Words."

Lessons Learned From Ethan, Nathan, and Joshua

Ethan Loomis, a dear friend of the family, who is one of my son Joshua's best friends, was diagnosed with Leukemia in April of 2008. The first video was made by Ethan as a testimony to God's faithfulness during his struggle.





The second video was filmed and edited by Ethan and features my son Joshua and another close friend of theirs, Nathan Schmidt, who wrote the short script to help teach an important lesson about how to treat -- or not to treat -- people who are hurting.

And, by the way, my son Joshua was the first guy sitting alone on the couch.

I am proud of these young men and am excited about the way God has worked in their lives for His glory, and I just wanted to share a little bit about their story from their perspective.

Steve Camp and Tim Challies on the Good and Bad of "Watchblogging"

This week I read a couple of interesting articles on the issue of Christian "watchblogging," the internet phenomenon involving the use of blogging to warn the churches about the sinful practices and theological errors they may encounter online or in their communities.

First, on April 6 Tim Challies offered a helpful article entitled Evil as Entertainment, in which he warned against the tendency to virtually revel in "all that is wrong in the church." I think he has hit on something here. It is the same kind of evil that leads so many Christians into gossip, and it should be avoided. Here is Tim's final admonition:

Filling our minds, our hearts, our computer screens, our blogs with all that is wrong in the church will do little to conform us into the image of the Savior. It can do little. My encouragement to you, whether you are a regular visitor to one of these sites or whether you simply visit them occasionally, is to examine your heart and to examine your motives. Do you visit such sites because they have information that you truly need to know? Or do you visit as a means of entertainment? Are you delighting in what is good and true and pure and lovely, or are you finding a strange, sick delight in all that is evil and ugly?

Shouldn't we all agree that we ought check our hearts whenever we seek to be informed about the errors that are revealed in watchblogs? Shouldn't we all agree that we can do the right thing with the wrong motive at times? Can't we perform the tasks of writing and reading watchblogs with the wrong attitudes in our hearts, failing to seek first of all the glory of God and the good of His Church? I think Tim's warnings are good for us all!

However, I also think there is much that is good and necessary about watchblogging. In fact, I have engaged in a bit of this myself, as regular readers of this blog know. I see it as a part of my duty as a pastor given by Jesus to the Church (Eph. 4:11f). I see it as a part of what Paul admonished elders to do for the churches. For example:

NKJ Acts 20:28-31 "28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. 31 Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears."


ESV Titus 1:7-9 "7 For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. 9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it."

This is where I believe that Steve Camp's April 8 response to Tim, entitled Blogging, Watchblogging, and Ministry, provides needed balance to what Tim has written. For example, Steve reminds us about the point I have raised above:

The Apostle Paul on Watchblogging

The Apostle Paul states the balance we all so desperately need in this area of Christian blogging. He issues a charge to pastors (but a principle we may all learn from and employ in our blogging) found in Titus 1:9b, "instruct in sound doctrine and refute those who contradict." One positive aspect, one negative aspect. One that instructs; the other that confronts. Both are quite necessary. Faithful instruction in sound doctrine will have to by its very nature confront and address that which is unsound according to Scripture if one is clearly teaching "the whole counsel of God." And by mentioning that which is unsound biblically, means that you must also instruct in that which is sound doctrine for addressing error without the clarification and context of Scriptural truth can push our righteous indignation buttons and be very motivational, but in the end unprofitable. And one that seeks only to state that which is positive biblically and fails to refute error, is more like Norman Vincent Peal than like the Apostle Paul, Peter, or our Lord Jesus Christ (cp, Matt. 23; 2 Peter 2; Jude; 2 Cor. 10).

That last sentence reminds me of the old saying - I think from Vance Havner - "Paul I find appealing, but Peale I find appalling." At any rate, Steve goes on to give some very good advice about questions we can ask ourselves before we blog and lessons we can learn about watchblogging, and it is a must read for those of us who want to honor Christ in our blogging.

I highly recommend checking out both of these men's articles, but especially Steve's practical wisdom regarding the necessity for watchblogging and the appropriate way to go about it.

Phil Johnson on the Importance of Sound Words

I was recently made aware that the video of Phil Johnson's message "Sound Doctrine; Sound Words" has been made available on YouTube. I am very much in agreement with most of what Phil has to say, even if some of it is critical of Mark Driscoll. He only mentions Mark by name a couple of times. However, he also refers to Seattle at least a couple of times, and he remarks that the Apostle Paul could never have been known as "the cussing Apostle." These appear to be allusions either to Mark or his ministry in Seattle.

If you would like to learn more about the history of Phil Johnson and Mark Driscoll on the issue of what makes for appropriate language in the pulpit, I think that Jonathan Christman has done a good job of kindly and fairly tracking it at his blog. (Thanks to Bob Gonzales for letting us know about these articles on the Reformed Baptist Discussion List.) The reason I am glad that Jonathan is tracking this from both points of view is that I think it has become a very important matter to the Church in America. I just happen to lean strongly toward Phil Johnson's end of the spectrum, and I think after you all view this video you will see why.



I agree with Mark that sometimes strong language and sarcasm are appropriate, especially when dealing with false teachers, but I couldn't agree more with Phil that language that is considered vulgar or is filled with sexual innuendo is out of place for the Christian, especially for the pastor-teacher from the pulpit.

Response to the House-Church Movement: Conclusion

In this conclusion to my series in response to the House-Church Movement (HCM), I would like first to list for you the links to the six main articles in the series. Since several people have indicated that it would be easier to have the articles listed in order, I hope that doing so here will provide what they have requested:

Part One: Does the Bible require that churches meet strictly in houses rather than in other kinds of buildings?

Part two: Does the Bible require that church gatherings be “completely open and participatory with no one leading”?

Part Three: Does the Bible require that the Lord's Supper be celebrated only as part of a “full meal”?

Part Four: What kind of authority – if any – do elders have in the churches?

Part Five: What is the meaning of ekklēsía?

Part Six: What is the proper understanding of Hebrews 13:17?

Although these six articles do discuss many of the major problems to be found in the House-Church Movement, I think it will be helpful to conclude the series by providing a summary of some of the primary concerns with what the HCM advocates are saying and of some of the possible ramifications. I will list briefly a number of points by way of both positive and negative critique.

Positive Critique

First, the focus upon every member of the body of Christ being truly necessary for its health and edification is a much needed reminder for many churches. There is a tendency in many churches to focus too much on a “professional clergy” to do the ministry instead of encouraging all the members of the body to discover and use their gifts for the edification of the whole. HCM advocates are right to seek to correct this problem. For example, the Apostle Paul says in his first epistle to the Corinthian church:

NKJ 1 Corinthians 12:4-22 “There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills. 12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not one member but many. 15 If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body," is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body," is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. 19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be? 20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you"; nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you." 22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary.

Second, the emphasis upon building relationships that are necessary to fulfill the Bible's commands regarding our responsibilities to one another is much appreciated. The Bible teaches, for example, that we must love one another (John 13:34), admonish one another (Rom. 15:4), bear one another's burden's (Gal. 6:2), and “consider one another in order to stir up love and good works” (Heb. 10:24). All such commands require that we actually know one another well, and HCM advocates are right to try to foster an atmosphere in which this may be more easily facilitated. This is especially important given that we live in a society that relies more heavily every day on technologies such as phones, email, and internet chat, all of which serve a good purpose but also tend to depersonalize interaction.

Third, the reminder that there is a future focus to the Lord' Supper is also appreciated. In my experience, far too many churches seem to miss this altogether. Yet, along with reverently remembering the sacrifice Jesus made for us on the cross (Luke 22:19), this is a legitimate and important focus of the Lord's Supper. For example, when He instituted the Lord's Supper, Jesus said, “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom” (Matt. 26:28-29, see also Luke 22:16-17). And Paul reminds us that when we partake of the Lord's Supper, we “proclaim the Lord's death till He comes” (1 Cor. 11:26).

Fourth, I also appreciate the warning by many HCM advocates about the danger of identifying the church with a building rather than with the body of Christ. This is another way in which people may too easily miss the Biblical emphasis upon relationships rather than events that happen at a building. The Bible clearly teaches, however, that the Church is the true temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 3:16-17; Eph. 2:19-22) and that the Church is a family, a “household of faith” (Gal. 6:10). HCM advocates are right to point out the danger of too much emphasis upon a physical building, especially when the building tends to become more important to some than the people who use it.

Negative Critique

Sadly, it is disturbing to me that the negatives outweigh the positives with regard to the House-Church Movement, at least as I see it.

First, HCM advocates tend to undermine the authority of Scripture through emphasis upon a “tradition” that they read back into Scripture. In this way, many of them are making requirements of certain practices that the Scriptures do not require. For example, they are teaching that meeting in homes, partaking of the Lord's Supper as a part of a larger meal, and having completely open, spontaneous meetings with no one leading, are all requirements of Scripture. Steve Atkerson provides a good illustration of this problem in all three of these areas:

1) With respect to meeting exclusively in homes, Steve Atkerson says in his article entitled Participatory Church Meetings, "In short, we believe that the patterns for church life evident in the New Testament are not merely descriptive, but are actually prescriptive (2Th 2:15 , 1Co 11:2). Thus, we believe in home-based and sized fellowships...." (See Part One of this series for my response.)

2) With respect to having completely open meetings that are interactive and spontaneous, with no one leading, Steve Atkerson says in the aforementioned article, “Holding church meetings in this spontaneous, interactive manner is in fact declared to be imperative according to 1 Corinthians 14:37, 'If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.' Thus, 1 Corinthians 14 is not merely descriptive of primitive church meetings. Rather, it is prescriptive of the way our Lord expects meetings of the whole church to be conducted.” (See Part Two of this series for my response.)

3) With regard to eating the Lord's Supper as a part of a larger meal, in an article entitled The Lord's Supper - Rehearsal Dinner For The Wedding Banquet of The Lamb, Atkerson argues in the same way he has about the Apostolic tradition and meeting in homes: "Why would anyone want to depart from the way Christ and His apostles practiced the Lord’s Supper? The apostles clearly were pleased when churches held to their traditions (1Co 11:2) and even commanded that they do so (2Th 2:15 ). We have no authorization to deviate from it." (See Part Three of this series for my response.)

In each of these cases – as I believe my responses in this series have demonstrated – HCM advocates are making these matters requirements when the Bible does not do so. But doesn't this actually lead to the subversion of Biblical authority? Doesn't it make the HCM advocates themselves out to be the real authority?

Now, I will be quick to point out that I do not think this is an intentional thing on their part. I don't think for a second, for example, that Steve Atkerson would ever intentionally undermine Scriptural authority. But the fact remains that this is what happens when anyone tries to say that his own practices have the same authority as Scripture when, in fact, Scripture itself does not command them.

Second, I am also concerned about the danger of legalism, which follows from my previous point. For the very heart of legalism is to demand of people what God does not demand and to judge their spirituality – or perceived lack thereof – on the basis of such supposed requirements.

Now, I again will be quick to add that I have not seen a big problem with legalism in most of the HCM advocates I have met. Most of them believe in salvation by grace through faith alone and would quickly decry legalism as a means of salvation. But this does not mean that the danger of legalism is not there when a group of Christians begins to teach as necessary what God has not said is necessary. Legalism is a danger for any such group. We all have this tendency, and we all need to remember Jesus' warning to the Pharisees:

NKJ Mark 7:6-7 “6 He answered and said to them, 'Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. 7 And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.”'"

Third, I am concerned that their strong emphasis upon partaking of the Lord's Supper as part of a full meal will lead to the danger of falling into the kind of abuses Paul confronted in Corinth (1 Cor. 11:17-34). For example, I fear that they will begin treating it as just any other meal, a problem that the church at Corinth had precisely because they were apparently partaking of the Lord's Supper in conjunction with a larger meal. (See my treatment of this issue in Part Three of this series.)

Fourth, I am concerned about an apparent lack of respect for Biblically constituted authority in the churches. I have highlighted and addressed this issue in Part Four, Part Five, and Part Six of this series. There is a simultaneous minimizing of the role and authority of elders in the churches while emphasizing the role of the congregation. While I appreciate their renewed stress on the importance of every member of the body being involved in ministry, I fear that there is not a due appreciation for the Biblical teaching of the necessity of godly elder leadership in the churches.

I also sense some hypocrisy here. HCM advocates often claim that the rest of us have been too influenced by pagan culture in our practices, yet they apparently fail to consider that their own lack of respect for authority (and church history) just happens to coincide very nicely with current cultural influences. This indicates a big blind spot in HCM advocates, for they seem quite willing to see most Christians – at least over the past 1700 years or so – as blind to cultural influences in their interpretation and application of Scripture, while they do not seem to recognize the likelihood that it is they who have been so blinded. It is particularly striking to me that they are even so critical in this regard of Christians since the Reformation. I mean, doesn't it seem to be at least possible – if not probable – that it is they, and not virtually all Evangelical Christians for the past 500 years, who have gotten it wrong?

Conclusion

I have attempted to summarize here some of the best and worst aspects of the portion of the House-Church Movement to which I have been responding. I hope that this series has been helpful to the blog's readers. For those who are interested, I would also remind you that there is an interview available, in which I have discussed a few of these issues with Roderick Edwards. In this interview I point out what I would like to end with here. I understand that these HCM advocates are attempting to hold us accountable to Scripture in their challenges to so many of our practices, and I actually appreciate their efforts to some extent. In response, I want to stress that it is my desire to return the favor. I hope in the process that I have spoken the truth as I see it with love (Eph. 4:15). Although I have had to adopt a confrontational tone at times, I want to assure my readers that my intentions – insofar as I am aware of them before the Lord – have only been to help my brethren in the House-Church Movement and in the larger body of Christ.

I am gratified that many have indicated to me that this series has indeed been helpful to them and has even helped a few churches to overcome or head off a great deal of strife over these matters. But, whether in agreement or disagreement with my views, as always, I welcome your comments.

Soli Deo gloria!

Keith

P.S. I have noticed that the titles of a few of the articles I have cited in this series were changed between the earlier posts and this conclusion. However, I have done my best to check the sources and believe that the titles and citations here are accurate. When I have time, I may try to go back and edit the previous articles to reflect these changes. I assume the links will still work correctly, but I haven't yet been able to go back and see if the articles themselves have been changed since I first cited them. This can be one of the more frustrating things about responding to blogs and online articles. Also, both Steve Atkerson and Beresford Job have published books since I wrote much of this series, but I think the content here – taken from their online sources – is still an accurate assessment of their respective positions.

Update Friday, August 07, 2009

I have now posted a followup article indicating some of the differences between the original articles I cited in this series and the present articles posted at the NTRF website. So far I have not seen anything that would lead me to change anything I have stated in this critique.

Paul Washer on the Converted Versus the Unconverted Church Member

The first passage that I thought of when I heard this illustration was in Matthew 3, where we read of the preaching of John the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees:

NKJ Mat 3:7-12 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, 'Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, 9 and do not think to say to yourselves,"We have Abraham as our father." For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. 10 And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

And then, of course, Jesus came teaching the same idea, namely that true salvation is accompanied by "fruits worthy of repentance." For example:

NKJ Matthew 7:17-21 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them. 21 Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

And on another occasion, Jesus reminded His disciples:

NKJ John 15:8 By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit; so you will be My disciples.

Does your life bear fruit worthy of repentance? Or do you say that Jesus is Lord, but deny His Lordship through your actions? Perhaps you are not a true believer, then? Or perhaps you are a believer such as the one Peter describes in his second epistle, who has become nearsighted or "shortsighted":

NKJ 2 Peter 1:5-9 But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, 7 to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. 8 For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

Have you gotten just far enough away from your salvation experience and from a close walk with Christ that you have forgotten what it means to have been cleansed from your former sins? If so, then the answer for you is the same as it is for the false believer. You need the Gospel! You need to remember that we can only be saved by grace through faith in Christ alone, through His sinless life, His atoning death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead. Ask the Lord to open your eyes that you may see and to renew faith and repentance in your heart. I am confident that he will answer!

But if you have never truly believed in Christ, but perhaps have learned to say all the right things and to make yourself appear to others as though you are a Christian, when you know you are not, then you need to recognize the precarious position that you are in. And you need to throw yourself upon the grace of God as well, asking Him to give you genuine faith and repentance for the first time. For only He can save you!

NKJ Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

The Bible teaches that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" and that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 3:23; 6:23). When it speaks of the "wages of sin," it is speaking of what we deserve for having done wrong in the sight of God, but it also teaches us about the "gift" of eternal life which we do not deserve. Thus God offers us freely through Jesus that which we cannot earn. He offers to do for us in Christ that which we cannot do for ourselves.

Will you put your faith in Jesus to save you from the punishment your sins deserve? He is willing to forgive you and give you eternal life if you ask Him. "If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" (Romans 10:9-10).

If you want to know more about the Gospel, or you would like some counsel from God's Word, please leave a comment with your email address, and I will contact you.

Free Copy of John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology

Reformation Trust Publishing is making available a free copy of the book Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology. They are charging $5.00 for shipping and handling, but this book is a steal at that price!

Here is a description of the offer from the Ligioner website:

Dear Pastors,

John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology is a
winsome portrait that dashes stereotypes about Calvin and the theological system that bears his name. In answer to why it is important for laypeople to study John Calvin's writings, Burk Parsons explains:

"First of all, the people of God should be wholeheartedly engaged, first and foremost, in the daily study of God's Word. Second, as God's people study God's Word in depth they will quickly understand the necessity of interpreting Scripture with Scripture, and that is precisely what Calvin helps us to do -- to the end that we might know and proclaim the whole counsel of God. Third, John Calvin was not an ivory-tower theologian who was out of touch with the real-life struggles of God's people. Not only did he struggle himself, but he knew well the plight of his people in his congregation. He could empathize with their afflictions and so shepherded them in preaching, praying, writing, and counseling. Calvin was, first and foremost, a pastor of God's people."

A small shipping and handling charge of $5.00 will be included. Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.

Disclaimer: This offer is limited to full-time pastors and church leadership. One copy per church.

I jumped at this opportunity, especially since I am reading through Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion this year. As always, I am happy to inform the blog's readers of any such opportunities I find.

Free Online Access to the ESV Study Bible

If you have thought about purchasing the ESV Study Bible, but are not sure you want to spend the money without first giving it a thorough examination, then you will definitely want to take advantage of the free online access that Crossway is allowing for the month of March. Normally this feature is available only to those who have purchased a copy of the ESV Study Bible, so be sure to check it out now while it lasts.


Here is the announcement from the ESV Bible Blog:

Crossway is pleased to make the ESV Online Study Bible available free—for anyone and everyone—for a limited time beginning today, March 2, 2009. Until now, the ESV Online Study Bible has been available exclusively to those who have purchased the print edition.

In addition to the features found in the print edition, the ESV Online Study Bible provides numerous interactive features enabling readers to:

• Record personal notes, reflections, and links
• Click hyperlinked cross references
• Search by verse, topic, or keyword
• Digitally highlight Bible passages with various colors
• Listen to audio of passages

For full access to these features through March 31, 2009, visit www.esvstudybible.org/online. Simply create a login and password. Email information will not be shared, nor will there be any obligation to purchase.

You can also access all the Articles and Charts & Maps. I think you will be impressed!

Blog Update

I just wanted to take some time to update the blog's readers on the status of a few things. As most of you know, I try to post at least once a week, and I have been able to maintain this over the past year for the most part. I have tried to continue posting about articles, books, websites, and software that I think will be helpful to my Christian brothers and sisters, especially those of the Reformed Baptist persuasion.

However, I haven't been able to post much in terms of original material. For example, I haven't kept up with the series of responses to the House-Church Movement, and I haven't found the time to work on a new series of posts about modifying the Baptist Confession of 1689. This is largely because of the busy and difficult days of the past year. Regular readers will remember my last Blog Update, for example, in which I referred to my wife's battle with ovarian cancer. She was diagnosed in April and underwent major surgery, after which she went through six cycles of chemotherapy ending in October. Then – in addition to some chronic pain – I came down with one cold and flu after another over the winter, which was apparently because of a weakened immune system due to a rather nasty and painful prostate infection. I am happy to say, however, that I am on the mend. And I am even happier to say that my beloved wife, Kim, has been doing very well, and follow up blood tests and CT scans still look great!

Anyway, I am not writing this update to complain, but only to inform you all about what has been going on. In fact, I don't have any complaints about the past year. God has graciously kept His promise to work through our trials for His glory and our good, and I wouldn't have wanted it any other way. And now I hope to get some time to write more. Perhaps I will even write about some of the various Scripture passages that the Lord has used to guide us through some of these rough seas.

With regard to the series of articles on the House-Church Movement (HCM), I have decided not to write the article about pastor pay as part of the series, since the series has been focused primarily upon the segment of the HCM represented by Beresford Job and Steve Atkerson, and neither of them appear opposed to paying pastors. So I didn't want to unfairly associate their view with this position, and I fear that addressing the matter as a part of a series focused primarily on them might have done this. The many HCM advocates who are opposed to paying pastors appear to be influenced instead by the book Pagan Christianity, so I will probably write an article separate from the series addressing that book's assertions on the issue. This means I will write a conclusion to the main HCM series soon, hopefully in the next couple of weeks.

Lord willing, I will also get back to the series on the Baptist Confession of 1689, in which I hope to offer some good suggestions for discussion among Reformed Baptists.

On a final note, I have been thinking that adding another writer to the blog might be a good idea. Or perhaps others will want to contribute the occasional article. Please pray for the Lord's leading and blessing. I am so grateful that he has used this blog thus far for the good of His people and for His own glory, and I long to see this continue and increase.

Thanks for your kind attention!

Keith

2009 Band of Bloggers Meeting

In case you haven't heard yet, the 2009 Band of Bloggers meeting will be held in conjunction with this year's Gospel Coalition Conference. It will be held on April 22. Here is the description for this year's meeting from the Band of Bloggers website:

This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.~ 1 Corinthians 4:1

From generation to generation, God has faithfully raised up and empowered His people to be servants of Christ and stewards of the Gospel. What is unlike generations in the past is the ability through technology to literally impact the entire world. For the past 5-10 years, the advent of blogging and social media has afforded followers of Christ to personally broadcast the good news of Jesus Christ while developing a web of relationships that has formed a gospel-centered community seeking to leverage whatever means possible to spread the fragrance of the knowledge of Christ everywhere–both in person and on the web.

Band of Bloggers is an informal fellowship of gospel-committed writers seeking to encourage faithfulness in what is spoken of Christ while raising the standard of discourse to reflect the character of those called to blog worthy of the gospel to which
we have been called.

This year, we are excited to announce that Band of Bloggers is partnering with The
Gospel Coalition Conference to host the 3rd Band of Bloggers Fellowship in conjunction with their national conference in Chicago, IL. On Wednesday, April 22, 2009, from 12:00-2:00 p.m., we will be hosting a lunch and fellowship at the Rosemont Conference Center. The theme of the conference is “Servants & Stewards” (building off of 1 Cor. 4:1), which expresses a two-pronged approach in faithfulness as servants and effectiveness as stewards. As servants, we want to make much of our Savior in not just what we say but how we say it. As stewards, we want to collectively labor to leverage all available means to propagate and publish the Gospel in our increasingly technologically-literate culture.

To do this, Band of Bloggers has sought the instruction and encouragement from well-known evangelical bloggers to addresses various issues. Taking a slightly different approach than in years past, we are given each person one question to answer in 5-7 minutes and then diving into Q&A/discussion. Here’s what we have in
store for 2009:
_______________
1. Servants and Stewards: Maximizing your blog in service to Christ (Timmy
Brister)
2. How can we blog for the glory of God? (Justin Taylor)
3. Improving usability: How to write so people can read (Mike Anderson)
4. How can you use your blog for the edification of the church? (Tim Challies)
5. How can you make your site more accessible and visible? (Eric Johnson)
6. Why should pastors blog? (Tullian Tchividjian)
7. What is the place for art and culture in Christian blogging? (Steve McCoy)
8. How can bloggers steward the teaching of the young, old, and the dead? (Tony Reinke)
______________
One of the highlights of Band of Blogger fellowship is the opportunity to meet people you may have encountered on the Internet and network together with people of kindred spirit who share a common passion for the glory of Christ and the advancement of His Gospel. Together with The Gospel Coalition National Conference, this will be a week that you will not want to miss!

Lord willing, I will be attending both of these gatherings this year. Hope to see many of my fellow bloggers there as well!

Free CD of Albert N. Martin's Doctrinal Sermons

The Sovereign Grace Audio Treasures website is offering a series of Al Martin's sermons on doctrine. The series is entitled Here We Stand. The messages can be downloaded separately or together. Or you can request a CD containing the whole series free of charge.

The series includes messages about the person and work of Christ, as well as about the various doctrines of salvation. Here is a brief description from the website:

This series of audio messages “is intended to provide a broad overview of the major elements of the Christian faith, as understood, believed preached and practiced by the true people of God in the past, and by this congregation today; an analysis of the faith once for all delivered to the saints.” It is designed to “confirm the old-timers among us, to initiate the new comers, and to inform the on-lookers.” It is suitable for personal or group study and can be taken as a whole or in part.

May God bless the faithful preaching of His Word!