The Lost Art of Discipleship

 

The Lost Art of Discipleship

Western Evangelicalism, the community I love and belong to, is far from Scriptural Christianity. That will always be the case because there is so much space to grow in every age.

But presently, our obsession with numbers, infatuation with the academy and rank individualism all hinder the great commission of our Lord to make disciples. It is my personal conviction that a reformation in discipleship is among the western church’s greatest needs and this article sets out to explain the what and the why.  

What is ‘Discipleship’?

If we had asked the Eleven disciples what Jesus had meant by the command “make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:16-20) they would surely have replied something like this, “Jesus wants us to do for the world what He has just done for us over the last three years.” And what had Jesus done for the Twelve? He had spent many long hours with them in person teaching them by both lip and life his ways. He did not invite them to a Sabbath sermon once a week but lived with them day by day and taught them as they went along. Verbal teaching and living example were entwined in one transformational environment. For example, he taught them to love their enemies by word (Matthew 5:43-48) but also demonstrated it by life; few hated him more than the Pharisees, but he was pleased to eat in the home of one (Luke 7:36) and to speak to another by night (John 3).

We might say that the teaching style of Jesus was less ‘classroom’ and more ‘apprenticeship’ where the student learns by both hearing and observing. This is what discipleship is – teaching another the ways of Christ by both lip and life. When Jesus expounded his discipleship commandment he said “teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:20). Not merely teaching them, but teaching them to obey. And if we were to ask how the ‘teaching to obey’ took place in his ministry, surely we’d have to say that it was by life as much as lip.

In this teaching methodology, we should note in passing, Jesus does not over-ride the normal means of influence God has hard wired into the social universe he created in the first place. How does one person influence someone else? By spending a lot of time in the communicating presence of the other. It really is as simple as that, and it works both ways. “Bad company corrupts good character” (1 Corinthians 15:33) and positively “whatever you have learned or received from me, or seen in me – put it into practice.” (Philippians 4:9). The Holy Spirit takes this God-created method of influence and uses it to form Christ in disciples.

Paul’s ministry follows this discipleship pattern. When he arrives in a new town he spends a lot of time with the people teaching them verbally and reinforcing that teaching with an open life among them. So much so that he was able to write to the Thessalonians “You know we lived among you for your sake. You became imitators of us and of the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 1:6) and “we loved you so much, we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well.” (1 Thessalonians 2:8). To the Corinthians he wrote both “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1) and “(Timothy) will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church.” (1 Corinthians 4:7)

In sum, the discipleship command of Christ is to take a small number of believers on a prayerful journey, spend many long hours with them in our homes, on walks, over meals, teaching them and doing life with them, such that what we teach is observationally reinforced by what we do. Through this life-lip combination we are to pray that they will grow in the likeness, grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ.

We should note one big difference between the discipleship practice of Jesus and ours. Jesus set a perfect example and could therefore disciple the Twelve on his own. But not so us, because no single believer reflects the character of Jesus fully, but a new follower will see something of the beauty of Jesus in a group of existing believers. Surely this is one of the reasons Paul takes a Gospel team around with him. He can point to their lives as well as his own. So Timothy, “I have no-one else like him, who takes a genuine interest in your welfare.” (Philippians 2:20)

The ‘art’ of Discipleship

When we analyse the discipleship method of Jesus we observe the following traits. First, Jesus only admonishes the Twelve on big mistakes and errors. He overlooks, we must assume from the Gospel records, many smaller foibles and weaknesses, but he does not overlook the likes of pride (Mark 9:33-37), prayerlessness (Mark 14:37-38) and faith-lessness (Matthew 8:26). Second, we note that Jesus takes what we might call unshaped men. He does not invite the religiously preformed Pharisees and Sadducees into his band. Why not? Because he would have had to spend thirty years deprogramming them first. Jesus takes unformed men and then intensely disciples them in the first few years of their journey  such that the foundations are set for the rest of their lives. We all know the crucial importance of first years.  I have a friend who keeps raptors. He has discovered over the years that how a bird is trained in its first months shapes its character for life. As with birds, and as with children, so with disciples: first years are crucial. Many problems pastors face among the sheep arise out of poor discipleship or a lack of discipleship in the first few disproportionally influential years of their walk with Christ.  

Thirdly, Jesus spent eons of time with his disciples. Suppose he spent just two hours a day with them, that works out as thousands of hours over the span of a three years. No wonder, “when they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.” (Acts 4:13) When we ponder why the Gospel seems to be having so little influence in a particular convert’s life, lament how little Jesus Christ is being formed in them, and perhaps beat ourselves up for not praying enough for them or imparting enough doctrine to them, could it simply be that this younger believer has spent too little time in the presence of godly older believers?  

Fourthly, Jesus’ teaching style is both formal and informal. Sometimes he has a body of teaching he wants to impart to his disciples and so he sits them down on a mountainside and instructs them. At other times the teaching arises out of an immediate event. What better time to teach folks about humility when they are arguing about who is the greatest? What better time to challenge faith when fear overtakes them?  In these informal settings truth is viscerally imparted, imprinted and remembered.

Hindrances to Discipleship

If discipleship is our task, the evangelical world I live in and love presents at least three major hindrances to the calling of every Christian to be a disciple-maker.

First, our obsession with numbers. Jesus invested in twelve men. Humanly speaking, is it really possible for us to meaningfully disciple more than a small handful of people at a time? And yet much in the evangelical world, aping as we often do the secular world, is about numbers. For example, pastors so easily aspire to be like the celebrity pastor-heroes whose churches are large and whose YouTube channels get the most hits. Few dream of shepherding a small flock into deep discipleship.

It is surely a Scriptural rebuke to our hang-up with numbers that apart from the size of the Jerusalem church, a size intended to reveal the supernatural origins of the Church (3000 and then 5000, Acts 2:41 and 4:4), we know nothing about the sizes of the churches in the New Testament: no church is condemned for being small and no church is praised for being large. Our wide-ranging infatuation with big numbers is a hindrance to the art of discipling a few well.

A second hindrance to discipleship is our obsession with the academy, by which I mean the vast influence of the teaching style and ethos of the academy upon the church. In the academy, teaching can be divorced from teacher. What matters is what is being taught, not the life or example of the teacher. Out there in the colleges of the world it does not matter if the teacher is a distant figure, or if their daily life does not line up with their teaching. In the academy mind and doctrine is prized over life and character. What you know is what counts, not your character or your daily life.

Our obsession with the academy is easily discerned with two questions to pastors: What would they most like to be known as, a disciple-maker or a scholar? And who do they admire most, clever pastors or disciple-makers? Deep in our ecclesiastical history we have been more influenced by the big-name Reformers who often came from the ranks of the academy than by the lost Anabaptist reformers who came from the ranks of the ordinary.

For sure, if we think that our task is merely to impart true doctrine at a distance we will never disciple the world.

Lockdown has perhaps exposed to us all the desperate need of the human element in disciple-making, because with only the doctrinal element left in place through online preaching, we have witnessed, have we not, the spiritual decline of some, if not many?

A third hindrance to disciple-making is the radical individualism of western culture which has deeply infected the church. This individualism refuses to take into account the impact of our actions on those around us, including young lambs in the flock. We simply do as we please. A seemingly mature Christian will, as a simple example, miss vital meetings for the poorest of reasons unable or unwilling to acknowledge the impact of their action on a young disciple who is looking up to them as an example.

Needed: A New Reformation

If we are to see this generation transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit into the likeness of Christ, we must forsake the ethos and methods of the academy, our obsession with numbers and the self-centred individualism of our age. We must return to the loving, simple, sacrificial, pure and human ways of our Master. The consequences will be enormous, not only upon those we are commanded to disciple, but upon ourselves too. Why? Because discipleship has a sanctifying effect upon the disciple-maker, whose whole life must be an open book. This fact becomes a spur to personal godliness and Christ-like behaviour.  

In this great discipleship task the Lord Jesus has been given all authority and promises to be with us always to the very end of the age.

 Photo by Christopher Sardegna on Unsplash

Irreversible Damage: the book every Parent of a Daughter should read

                                                       

The Transgender Craze

There is no doubt that living in a fallen world, a small percentage of people will feel uncertain about their boyness or girlness. We live east of Eden and everything about us is messed up. No-one has escaped the twisting effects of the Fall. People with gender dysphoria ought to be loved and treated with respect. No genuine follower of Jesus could ever be a 'transphobe."

In this blog, I shan't outline the Biblical view of transgender, but concentrate on a craze that is spreading across America; and when America sneezes, we this side of the Atlantic catch a cold.

Abigail Shrier is an American journalist, who picked up on a remarkable change taking place among teenage girls over the last 10 years.

Ten years ago, say, those identifying as trans were a tiny minority of the population, and most of them were boys. Over the last ten years the number identifying has vastly increased and the ratio has flipped from mostly boys to mostly girls.

Shrier sets out to examine what is happening and comes to some conclusions. You may not agree with everything she says, but every parent of girls is wise to listen up.  

This book has had its critics - any book that questions the transgender craze will attract a flotila of detractors today - but it has been named book of the year by The Economist and one of the best books of 2021 by The Times. So its contents must attract respect.

What's going wrong?

In no particular order, many factors are playing into this craze. 

First, many girls are lonely and unhappy. They see each other in person less than a previous generation and tend to live their lives online. As if the teenage years are not filled with enough angst, today's girls are pushed to the edge. This unhappiness is the breeding ground for offers of salvation, and many of those offers are coming from the trans community.

Second, a host of young advisors have arisen online all pushing their peers into diagnosing themselves as trans. The mantra is that if you think you are trans, then you must be.

Thirdly, the so-called experts have adopted  "Affirmative Care" as their tune. The idea is that the child knows best and our task is to agree with whatever a child says. In no other area of parenting would such a preposterous stance be taken, but in gender ideology this is what you must do. The idea that a child knows best is of course ludicrous since children and adolescents by the very nature of this learning and formational phase of life need guidance and often change their minds. The facts are that 70% of children who question their gender grow out of it in time - it's just one very common phase of life. Many readers will remember passing through it.

Fourthly, parents are warned that if they do not affirm their child's new identity, the child might commit suicide. This "gun to the head" strategy naturally startles many parents out of pushing back - even though in many cases the self-diagnosis of their daughter has come out of the blue and been preceded by no evidence in the home: peer contagion is the real cause.

Fifthly, the online transcommunity can act like a cult. If any members of your family refuse to affirm you, cut them off. Marooned on a island of one opinion there is no-one left to lovingly give that 'push-back' we all desperately need.

Sixthly, in the US schools have become places of social engineering as much as education; places where the school presumes authority over the parent and gives out advice and medication unknown to the parent and over their heads.

Seventh, the administration of puberty blockers such as Lupron to delay puberty is dangerous.  Not only does it prevent hormones from washing over the brain thus helping it to develop; not only are its long term effects unknown, it sets the child on an inevitable journey towards trans. Why? Because the girl who takes them ceases to develop normally and becomes even more isolated from her female companions. This isolation merely fuels the idea that she must be trans. And so she moves onto testosterone, which now develops male characteristics in her body, with many additional potential new harms.

Shrier explains what happens once the treatment begins: How a girl moves from puberty blockers to testosterone to "top surgery" (breast removal) and then for a minority to mutilation of one of her limbs to form a 'penis' not.

What should parents of daughters do?

Christian parents need to share the Gospel with their daughters, in which we find our glorious and true identity, not in our gender or sexuality, but in Christ. We are made in God's image, redeemed by the blood of Christ, loved by God the Father, brought into the community of God's loving people. This is where we find our true and satisfying identity - not in the secondary or tertiary factors of our lives such as gender or sexuality.

Shrier urges parents of daughters to adopt a seven-point strategy to counter the transgender craze:

1. don't buy your child a smartphone - the source and cause of most new adolescent ailments today

2. dont give up your authority as a parent - you do know best

3. don't support gender ideology in your child's education

4. keep home life private - you don't need to post everything going on in your family online - which could add to stress

5. if your daughter is getting caught up in this craze take radical steps to save her - move city if need be

6. stop analysing and diagnosing every aspect of girlhood - every mood or emotion does not need a medical term or diagnosis

7. don't be afraid to celebrate the girl being a girl

Conclusion

This book has numerous stories about churned up parents, messed up kids and regretful young adults. 

I would urge every parent of girls to read it. You won't agree with everything but it will alert you to the deep problems and temptations girls now have to face in our disturbed post-modern post-Christian world.

Christian parents, not the state or the school, are responsible before God for bringing up their children. If our kids go astray into online cults on our watch, that is surely our fault.

Be informed so that you can love, teach and warn them.

John Wesley Turns in his Grave: Lessons from Methodism's Apostasy

 Something terrible happened on the 30th June 2021

John Wesley is buried outside a chapel in London. Methodism is named after his methodical organisational practices and regards him as its founder. 

Born in 1703 John Wesley faithfully preached the Gospel, travelling, it is estimated, some 250,000 miles on horseback up and down the country. Over his grave is written the words: 

"This great light arose (by the singular providence of God) to enlighten these nations, and to revive, enforce, and defend, the pure apostolic doctrines and practices of the primitive church...."

Wesley was a staunch defender of the "pure apostolic doctrines and practices of the primitive church" which included the Scriptures' clear view of marriage and sexuality.

But on the 30th June this year - had anyone watched his London grave - they would have seen John Wesley turn, first in sadness and tears and secondly in righteous anger and disgust. 

For sure, if he had been alive on that fateful Wednesday John Wesley would have denounced and abandoned the Methodism he founded.

Why? Because the present rulers of methodism passed this sad motion by a vote of 254 for and 46 against:

"The Conference consents in principle to the marriage of same-sex couples on Methodist premises throughout the Connexion and by Methodist ministers, probationers or members...." (see HERE)

In effect British Methodism has abandoned the historical, orthodox and biblical teaching that marriage is between one man and one woman, and the teaching that declares that  all sexual relationships outside this divine plan (such as fornication, adultery and homosexual practice) are wrong, harmful and sinful.

What can Bible believing churches learn from this tragic turn of events? (We have called it apostasy, because apostasy is not only turning from Biblical truth, apostasy includes turning away from Biblical behaviour). 

In some good news, the Nigerian Methodist church cut ties with its British counterpart just a few days later, with one insightful African Pastor saying: 

...what the British Methodist Conference has done was predicted by John Wesley, “a time will come when the Methodist Church will exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion and denying the power thereof unless they continue with the spiritual fervency with which they first started.”  

See more HERE.

 Reflections on June 2021

First, let us remember that the Gospel reaches out to all sinners. No group of people who call themselves after the name of Jesus Christ -  the friend of sinners - can reject or despise anyone of any race, orientation or sexuality.  So we are to love and welcome murderers, idolators, liars, fornicators, thieves, adulterers, slanderers and homosexuals - everyone in Paul's list in 1 Corinthians 6 (see below). Everyone must hear the transforming Gospel of Jesus Christ. Let homophobia - the dislike or hate of those who engage in acts of homosexuality - be condemned, for God so loved the whole world. 

Secondly, we must resolutely refuse to accept the accusation that if you disgaree with homosexual practice you are by definition homophobic. This is a lie. We disagree with theft but we are not burglarphobic; we disagree with adultery but we are not affairphobes; and we disagree with homosexual practise but we are not homophobes. This accusation is designed to slur the character of anyone who disagrees with passing present western morality.

Thirdly, intrinsic to the Gospel, let us remember is the message of repentance. When behaviour which the Scripture calls sinful is encountered in anyone we are to call them to repentance. We are to tell those who are greedy to repent and give to the poor. 

We are to call those who worship idols to repent and to worship the living God alone. 

We are to call those who steal to repent and to work and give to the poor.

And we are to call all those engage in sexual sin to repent, whether they be fornicators, adulterers or practicing homosexuals.

This has always been the Gospel message of the Christian church and nothing has changed in 2000 years to warrant a change in direction or doctrine; and this approach remains the message believed by the vast majority of Christians across the world today, and always will be.

Fourthly, 'marrying' same-sex couples is accepting and condoning sin in the ranks of God's holy church. Let's not play with words: fornication, homosexual practice and adultery are no different from theft, lying, murder, hatred, idolatry or any other behaviour the Scriptures call sin.

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders not theives nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderes nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

But wonderfully Paul is able to go on and say,

"And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, your were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (verse 11)

Fifthly, preaching the Word of God week in and week out faithfully will prevent us from falling into such disarray. No church that faithfully preaches the whole counsel of God will drift with the world. But where the Word of God is not preached and not central, churches will discover that they are shaped by the reigning morality and philosophy of the world around it. The church then becomes indistinguishable from the world.

Sixthly, our task is to fear God, not men. We all know that persecution is on the way for all who are faithful to the Gospel. Wesley had many enemies. Churches sensing that the world will not tolerate different views from their own on sexuality are jumping left right and centre before they are pushed. Our task is not to follow the madness of crowds, but to fear God and be faithful to him.

In the seventh place, if compromise is seen as a way of winning the world, we are seriously mistaken. The church has always been attractive precisely because it was counter-cultural, because it ran against the grain, because it was different. Churches that follow every contour of western philosophy and morality will dwindle and soon become irrelevant to a lost world.

Never start a human organisation!

There are other lessons to learn from this tragic apostasy.

First, numbers are no measure of truth. 254 members of that Methodist council were 100% wrong while 46 were 100% right. The Scriptures, not numbers, are the test of truth.

Secondly, the moment we bind ourselves to a man-made institution, we risk being dragged into error.  I wonder what the 46 faithful members will now do? Could their bond with the man-made organisation cause them to cave in too, or will they now bravely leave a movement that has so seriously compromised itself? Our sympathy and prayers should go to this brave band of protestants.

Thirdly, we remember that Heaven does not recognise any human denomination. It does not recognise The Anglican Church, the Baptist Church or the Methodist Church or the FIEC. The Bible only recognises individual faithful Gospel churches scattered across the world, one here, another over there.

All groups of churches, all denominations are human inventions. That includes the one I am personally affiliated to, the Fellowship of Indepedent Evangelical Churches. All these are human organisations and we must never confuse them with "The Church."

When a group of churches begins to drift en masse from the Gospel, we are being shown the wisdom of God's ways. The One True Church, made up of faithful congregations dotted here and there never drifts with time, it remains faithful, but human organisations all drift from the truth.

Fourthly, never start any Christian organisation - because all human organisations drift with time. They have to. Do you know of any human-Christian organisation that has not drifted with time even for 100 years? I know of none. Missionary societies that once burned with zeal are now as lifeless as a dodo, publishers that once vowed to be faithful to the truth now compromised, Gospel organisations who fearlessly preached the Good News now lamely given over to a social Gospel and Bible Colleges once committed to the Scriptures now weighed down by life-sapping academia.

Anyone who founds a human denomination or organisation will one day turn in their grave when it inevitably drifts far from its original foundations. 

Only the One True Church of Jesus Christ, loosed from all man-made organisations, remains faithful and constant in all of time.

Don't start a movement, however noble: or if you do, build its terminal demise into your will. 

Having started Fishermans Press, I plan to insist on its demise in my will.

Commentaries on John's Gospel: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

 

 Tools for the Preacher

As tools adorn the walls of a carpenter's workshop, so commentaries adorn the shelves of a preacher's study. Which is why preachers are as reluctant to lend out their precious commentaries as carpenters are loath to lend out their chisels.

A commentary itself is the summary of perhaps a dozen other commentaries, and so, as the preacher sits with say 6 commentaries on his desk, he sits in the presence of 72 teachers. What a privilege! 

 Good Commentaries and Bad

I have bought and read one too many poor commentaries in my lifetime, but good has come of bad for I am more discerning today as to which commentaries I buy and what expectations I place on each. Here is a general summary of commentary types, and the most significant fact to start with is Who Wrote It? As the author, so the commentary, hence the categories below:

Liberal commentators. These chaps and chapesses don't take Scripture seriously and filter Holy Writ through tiny human eyes judging and casting out what they either do not understand or do not like. Although these come-and-go commentaries are dated before the ink is dry, and though they are generally untrustworthy, they alert the preacher to possible issues that an unbeliever may stumble over, and hence may be worth answering from an evangelistic and apologetic point of view in the sermon. Sometimes there is a nugget of gold, but it's often well hidden under dunes of dusty scholastic sand and it may not be worth walking across the desert to find said lode. 

I have made it a general rule to have one liberal commentator to hand, so that I may better understand and relate to the unbelievers in the congregation, and to lighten up my study times with a little mirth: when demythologising the Gospels the liberals come up with truly laughable explanations, see below.

Evangelical commentators, type a - scholars. Infinitely better are the evangelical scholars. They can see, a considerable advantage over the liberal types. They take Scripture seriously and many good technical facts can be gleaned from them. But they are limited because their daily environment is the academy, not the church. Often they are writing to combat some new silly idea coming forth from their liberal colleagues and when they do, their own writing turns as dry as dust. For that reason, these commentaries are time bound. There is a nigh-infinite difference between writing in and for the academy and writing for the Church of Jesus Christ, not least in terms of application, so when I take up one these commentaries my expectations are quote low. And therefore rarely am I disappointed.

Evangelical commentaries, type b - not scholar and not preacher. There is a second type of evangelical commentary which is written by someone who is located somewhere in the Church but is not in an academic institution nor are they recognised pastors or teachers in a local church. They may well be parachurch folks who also turn their hand to writing commentaries. Once you know that the author is not a church pastor or church teacher, again, you don't raise your expectations too high.

Evangelical commentaries, type c - preachers. The very best commentaries are written by preachers, who not only understand the text, but just as importantly, understand the flock for whom the Holy Spirit wrote the text. I trust the writings of a brain surgeon who actually does operations infinitely more than Dr Professor brain surgeon, who dwells in some ivory palace.

We should say that not all preaching commentaries are equal. Some are just the sermon notes of the preacher. Some run off into flights of fancy whose airport must have been, you assume, some event in the life of the preacher's church at the time he put pen to paper.

But others contain much pure gold.

To be sure if all a preacher consults are the scholars it's likely his preaching will be as dry, formal and cerebral. If he consults the preachers his own heart will be warmed and then he will be able to warm the hearts of his hearers.

John's Gospel

So, I have been preaching on the Seven I ams of Jesus and the Seven Miraculous Signs, two series, back to back. (I do not bow at the altar of expositional preaching - there is no hint in Scripture that preaching through a book cover to cover has any more merit than series of topical sermons, such as the above). 

I did not use a liberal commentary in these two series, because I would have wasted so much energy disagreeing with the invention of more fanciful miracles to explain away the real ones. 

(Know this one? Apparently Jesus did not turn five loaves and five fish into food for thousands. Instead a little boy's generosity sparked crowd-wide generosity?! Can you image how long it would take for the lad to make his way to every one of those 5000 family groups to explain what he had done? All in one afternoon. All assuming that everyone was inspired by his story rather than despising him, as was the want of too many men in those days. Let's say he spoke to each family unit for one minute that is over 80 hours to get around them all. [Perhaps the lad flew around? Perhaps he used Twitter?] This liberal tale is far more difficult to believe than the 'simpler' miracle of the mighty Son of God who created the stars making bread multiply).

Here are the commentaries I did use, starting with the least useful and progressing to the most useful:

The Gospel According to John - Don Carson (scholar)

Many years ago when I was seeking advice about my future, I wrote to Don Carson and he wrote back a long understanding letter to me, a complete stranger, so I honour this man greatly. The problem with this commentary is that it so often tackles contemporary problems which the liberals raise that the wood is lost among the trees. Many insights but too cerebral. But what else can you expect from a scholar? Think about it. I doubt it will be known in 50 years.

The Gospel According to John - Leon Morris (scholar)

Another scholar, lots of insights, but limited usefulness for pastors and preachers.

New Testament Commentary John - William Hendricksen (scholar)

Same as above, Hendricksen is always filled with technical details, but he tends to be more practical than Morris or Carson.

The Gospel of John - AW Pink (Pastor-Preacher)

Now we're getting somewhere. With daily real-life experience of God's people, Pink is able to apply the Scriptures to hearts and lives. Sometimes he goes off on flights of fancy, but mostly he's a steady, if a little lengthy, guide.

The Bible Expoisiton Commentary (Warren Wiersbe) Matthew - Galatians

I love the work of this preacher. The only problem comes when the commentary reads like a sermon whose headings and arrangement have shaped the material's order a little too much.

Expository thoughts on John - J C Ryle

At the very top of my list is the 150 years old Expository Thoughts on John by Pastor JC Ryle (I know some people call him a bishop, but that title is unknown in Scripture, which calls him a pastor). What's especially useful about his two volumes on John is that Ryle relegates the detailed analysis of the text to small type footnotes in a sections on their own, and concentrates on real food in the ordinary font size main text. 

Ryle understands and applies the relevance of every verse and story to the souls, struggles and joys of the people he ministered to.

He's not writing for the academy, he's writing for the church of ordinary people like you and I. And like the work of Pastor Matthew Henry, Pastor Ryle's work has been reprinted many times.

If you can only afford one commentary, always go for a preacher as author, and if it's John's gospel go for Ryle.

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Seven Reasons Why Christian Believers must meet in Person

 

 June the 21st!

As June the 21st approaches - the day when the UK Government have planned to remove all legal restrictions - it's appropriate to remind ourselves why Christians must meet up in person. Why online is not enough.

#1 God has created us social creatures

The first reason is a universal one, true for believer and for non-believer. We were made in the image of a Social God. God has never been lonely. Before he created any other beings, whether angels or humans, he enjoyed perfect communion with himself, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. We catch some of that loving communication in John's Gospel, where the Father and Son are in constant conversation with one another. 

Since we have been made in God's image, we have been made social beings who are designed to be in relationship with others. God's words about Adam, "it is not good that man should be alone" were a universal stamement of his design for mankind, not merely a footnote about marriage.

#2 We do not have all the gifts

The second reason, still staying with the image of God, and still applicable to believer and non-believer is that none of us have all the gifts we need to survive. The theologians talk about the 'economic Trinity' by which they mean that the differing works of the Three glorious Divine Persons all compliment one another. In the work of salvation, for example, The Father sends the Son, the Son comes into the world and bears away our sins and the Holy Spirit makes the work of salvation effective by changing our hearts. The Father did not take away our sins, the Holy Spirit did not send the Son. The Three glorious Divine Persons each played a different and complimentary role in the salvation of sinners.

In a faint echo of the economic Trinity, we need the co-operation and help of others. In the same way that Adam was 'incomplete' so each one of us lacks what another can supply. 

In church terms we are given the New Testament image of the church as a body, where each one of us is only one part, needing the other parts. A foot cannot see, so it needs an eye. An eye cannot walk, so it needs a foot. 

The sooner we realise our desparate need for one another, the more we will give ourselves wholeheartedly to fellowship.

Should we not say here that in fellowship we mature into the likeness of Christ? And should we not issue a warning that outside of fellowship we can so easily drift towards oddness and strangeness? 

#3 God sets the example - he wants fellowship

A third reason we need fellowship is the very example of God. God who is self-sufficient, the fount of his own existence and love, nevertheless wants to be with people!

In the garden of Eden God walked with Adam in the cool of the day, so visible that Adam and Eve could hide from him (or so they thought!)

When mankind was cast out of God's visible presence, God still wanted to be with people and gave the command to Moses, “Have them make a sanctuary for me and I will dwell among them.”(Exodus 25:8) 

And then God sent his Son, Immanuel, God with us, to live among us. “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” (John 1:14)

And what is heaven? Heaven is the place where,  Revelation 21:3, “the dwelling of God is with men and he will live with them."

God himself sets the example! he wants to be in fellowship with us, and has paid the ultimate price for this to become a reality. Through the death of his Son he has reconciled us to himself.

If God wants fellowship, because he is love, then surely the redeemed should follow his example.

#4 Jesus commands us to meet

Let's move now to more specifically Christian reasons for meeting. Jesus commands us to meet. By his Spirit, he inspired the writer of Hebrews with these words, “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing" (Hebrews 10:25). If we had no other Scripture on this matter, this one would suffice. Jesus our Saviour commands us to meet up! He commands us not to get out of the habit. And more...

#5 Meeting is not just about ourselves!

...the Spirit-inspired writer goes on to remind us that when we meet we encourage one another. Yes, we meet for our own well-being, benefit and blessing. But we also meet for the benefit of others:

“Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”

The clear implication is that when we meet up, our mere presence encourages others. We may not even speak to them! They may only see us in the other corner of the room! And yet our mere presence encourages. Is it not also true that our mere absence discourages?

#6 There is blessing in meeting together

The Garden has gone, so too the temple. Jesus Christ is sitting at the right hand of the Father in heaven. But now his Spirit dwells in each one of us, so that we each on our own can be called a temple. But when we meet together, Jesus promises to be with us in a special way.  “Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20) Yes, the Lord Jesus is with us when we are on our own, but he is particularly and especially with his gathered people. 

Do we want the blessing of Christ's presence? Then we must meet with one another!

#7  A Foretaste of Heaven

Our final reason for meeting is that fellowship is a foretaste of heaven. Heaven is filled with people, “a great multitude no-one can count, from every nation, tribe, people and language standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb.” (Revelation  7:9)

We shall be perfected. "We shall be like him for we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2). As we have fellowship with one another in that city of light we shall catch a glimpse in the faces of one another of the reflected glory of Jesus Christ.  

Heaven is not a desert island, its a city filled with people. And as we enjoy fellowship here below we are catching a glimpse of glory to come.

Put together, these reasons provide a compelling case for the absolute necesity of Christian fellowship. We need fellowship as a plant needs rain and sun. Without it we shall never mature into the likeness and beauty of Christ. With it we do.

The Deafening Silence of Adam

 

 

Never was a Silence so Loud

There are no examples either in Holy Writ or in human literature of a silence as loud as Adam's silence in Genesis 3, when with Eve, they were approached by the Tempter.

From the Tempter's opening words to the eating of the fruit, Adam is mute.

Shamefully mute. Culpably mute. 

A Story for our Times

 

In our gender confused era Genesis 3 is a story we need to pay heed to. It's a true story, a true account of an actual event. We know that because the rest of Scripture confirms the historical veracity of a real Adam and a real Eve.

 

One of the ways in which our culture is most confused about gender is in the role between men and women. The word "equality" is used without any reference to the biological and psychological differences between men and women. 

 

And since the word "equality" has a justice ring about it, to even question what someone means by "equality" is tantamount to patriarchy, sexism, or a hundred other modern sins.

Christians, tragically, have simply drifted with their culture. Church after church has appointed women as elders, pastors or vicars in a headlong rush to avoid the charge of sexism and cultural irrelvancy.

Many Christian marriages are disordered and upside down under the same untouchable idol and mantra of "equality."

 

Order but no hierarchy

Christians who remain faithful to Scripture, and this is probably the Majority World of Christians, no longer infected by the West, know better.

Order between the sexes in marriage and church begins with order between the members of the Godhead. In 1 Corinthians 11:3, Paul writes that "the head of every man is Christ, and the head of every woman is man, and the head of Christ is God" (which must mean God the Father). 

Just as there is an order in the Godhead, with the Father as the first person, the Son begotten of the Father as the second, and the Holy Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son as the third Person, so, made in God's image there is an order between the sexes.

 

All three Persons of the Godhead are equal in glory and divinity but there is order.

 

In the same way men and women are both made in the image of God and possess the same dignity and value, but there is an order between them. God made Adam first, he made Eve for Adam, he made Eve out of Adam. He gave his word to Adam who had to pass it on to Eve. Order.

 

The "Godhead model" should inform the behaviour of every Christian church and every Christian marriage. 

Women should never lead in the church because it turns God's order upside down. They should never teach men for the same reason (1 Timothy 2:12). No heirarchy, just order.

 

Women should submit ('order themselves under') to their husbands (Ephesians 5:25). Again, nothing to do with hierarchy, just order.  

The world will never get this, but Christians should. Christians have the Godhead as their model of equal glory but distinct order. The world has no model and simply hears "heirarchy" when we say the word "order." Christians should not expect the world to understand or accept this. They can't.

Back to Adam's Deafening Silence

What went wrong in the garden of Eden was a double sin. Adam sinned by 'just doing nothing' and 'letting it all happen'. And Eve sinned by taking the initiative.

This is what should have happened.

The moment the Tempter approached Eve, Adam should have stepped in "Listen here, you speak to me." (Or as someone crudely put it, "Hiss off.")

And at that very moment, Eve should have said, "Speak to my husband."

Eve, perhaps flattered by the attention, and erring by taking the lead, fell. And Adam failing to take responsibility, said absolutely nothing. And Adam's guilt is greater than Eve's.

 

And so we see that the first sin was far more than simple disobedience. It was a gender sin, an order sin, a marriage sin.

The Importance of Order

 

On the one hand, it could be argued that disorder in a church where women lead and disorder in a marriage where the wife leads are matters of secondary importance - a denial of the divinity of Christ is a primary doctrine by contrast - they are not minor issues.

For the moment we relegate God's divine order between the sexes to merely a cultural matter which we can dispense with because the culture of our day dictates our anthropology, it leads to much more.

We must then begin to rethink every other "cultural relic" of the Scriptures and allow homosexual practice (which the Bible calls sin) into the church, and then transgender ideology, and then....?

Sticking to the Truth

 

Instead of drifting with the times - or shall we say with the politically correct minority - we should maintain our witness: men and women are absolutely equal when it comes to value, dignity and salvation. But they have been created with complimentary roles, whose source is the order between male and female, and whose deeper spring is the image of a triune God, whose eternal inter-Personal love is ordered. 

May the Lord help true churches stick to the truth, for it, and it alone, will set men and women free.

Will NASA find life on Mars?

 

3 Billion Dollars!

NASA are in the process of spending three billion dollars on a most remarkable mission to Mars. The main purpose of the mission is astrobiology - read, an attempt to find signs of life on Mars. 

Not martians but microbes.

The mission is nothing short of a marvel of science and technology.

Laying aside the difficulties of just getting to Mars there is the extremely tricky final "minutes of terror," where the spacecraft has to slow down as it passes through the atmosphere and land safely.

To gently land so as not to ruin the expensive equipment on board the NASA engineers decided to lower the rover, named Perseverance, from a rocket-powered sky crane which then soared away and crash landed a little distance away.

NASA's Sky Crane for gently lowering Perseverance

To add splash to the mission, underneath the rover is a tiny helicopter named 'ingenuity' which will be able to give some aerial shots of the planet in the weeks to come.

Wonderful technology. And so far it has all worked!

Slaves of Dogma

How then should we think about such a mission? To paraphrase a line from David Bowie, will they find life on Mars?

If we think as a scientific materialist, someone who believes that matter and laws and time are all that is necessary to explain all things, here is how we would reason.

Everything in the universe has created itself without the input of a Great Mind. Solar systems created themselves around stars as gas and particles obeyed the natural law of gravity. 

And then life organised itself from simple to more complex until the first cell 'appeared' and from then on it was upwards and onwards.

Natural Law + Chance + Time = present universe. 

Of course, we must not confuse scientific materialism with science. There are many scientists who don't believe a word of the tale told in the previous paragraphs. But it is fair to say that many scientists are scientific materialists.

If you start without God, then the answer to Bowie's question, "Is there life on Mars?" is "Could be so" and "Hope so." Why hope so? Because it would confirm to those who refuse to believe that God is the source of life, that life can spontaneously arise anywhere.

No longer Slaves

But what if you begin to think about 'life on mars' as a follower of Jesus not enslaved to scientific materialism?

Well, everything changes! And we end up with good reasons for doubting the existence of any kind of life on mars.

Let's wear a science hat to start with. 

At last we can think outside the box, creatively and freshly - as all true scientists should. What a relief! We do not have to be slaves to scientific materialsim - the dogma that everything arises from matter.

This is how we can freely think.

Science tells us that complicated systems never arise spontaneously. The amount of order that nature by law, chance or time is able to conjure up is extremely limited. Beautiful but limited. Sand dunes. Snow flakes. Rotating storms. This rules out such incredibly complex things as cells.

Natural Law and Chance are limited in the amount of complexity they can conjure

Secondly, science teaches that should a complex thing be created by someone, it will become disordered over time, left to itself. Cars rust, machines corrode and wear out. As time passes everything becomes more disordered left to itself. Visit the site of the Chernobyl disaster and what will you find? Houses, hospitals and swimming pools in very considerable decay and decline. And that is only 35 years ago! The only exceptions to this downward spiral rule are systems which are maintained by an intelligent mind. Car mechanics can keep a care from decay. Painters and decorators can renew paintwork.

Bumper cars near the site of Chernobyl: look what a mere 35 years of decay has done

All systems run downhill. There are no exceptions to this rule anywhere. Evolutionism insists exactly the opposite - that systems run uphill from the less complex to the more complex. That cannot and does not happen, anywhere in the universe. 

Third, time cannot come to the rescue. The  complexity of just one simple protein of a cell (think of a machine part, like a piston in an engine) is such that the probabalistic reserves of the solar system - remember the earth is said to be only 4.5 billion years old - are insufficient to produce one single protein by chance. So says one of our premier origins scientists Stephen C Meyer, in "Signature in the Cell."  And one protein is only one of dozens or hundreds required to power a single cell.

Fourthly, the simplest explanation of the grand complexity we find in nature is that a Great Mind - a Creator - made life. Science is always looking for the simplest explanation of things. This is the most reasonable explanation of life.

So if we wear a science hat and follow the simplest explanation we should be convinced that if life exists on Mars it must have been put there by a Creator.

But now let's put on our Christian hat. When we do, I think we must doubt if there is life on any planet but earth.

Scripture teaches us that planet earth is very special because man is very special. God made man alone in his image and gave him dominion over the earth. Mankind is the pinnacle of God's created order and the rest of the universe was made, first for God's glory, and second for our enjoyment and benefit. 

Where there is no man, there is no other life. All other, lower life, is connected to mankind. 

If there is no mankind on Mars, there is no other kind of life there either. 

So are we likely to find mankind on Mars? Well obviously not at present, for we have detailed enough photos to prove that; but the way the Bible speaks about mankind seems to imply that this earth is mankind's only unique home.

The emptiness of space doesn't trouble a Christian. If there was no life anywhere else in the universe that would not trouble us, for it merely points us to the specialness of our planet and us. And the vastness of space reveals to us the infinite glories of God.

People are the reason the rest of the living world exists, so why would God create life on a planet where he did not also put human beings?

The unique Cross of Jesus Christ

But that's not where a Christian stops, because the Scriptures go further and teach us that our world is unique for a second reason: the earth became the scene of God's plan of redemption.

Here to earth came the Saviour of the world, and here on earth a unique event took place, the suffering of Jesus Christ for the sins of all who will believe.

The way Scripture talks about the cross makes it clear that it was once-for-all. Jesus did not die on half a dozen planets, he died only here. Indeed it is unthinkable - and perhaps as blasphemous as the Roman Catholic Mass - to think that Jesus could have died many times, once here and then at other times on distant planets.

No-where do the Scriptures hint that the death of Christ atoned for creatures other than human beings on planet earth.

These two doctrines: the creation of the universe with the earth at its centre (not the geographical centre, but God's purposes centre) plus the uniqueness of the cross of Jesus Christ must shape our view about life on Mars.

So will they find life on Mars?

Men and women who refuse to acknowledge God as the author of creation would love to find life on Mars. For them it would seem to prove that life can spontaneously arise anywhere in the universe. Let's remember that implicit Creator-denial is a major part of this mission's (secret) philosophical purpose.

Christians, I believe, should doubt if life will be found on Mars.

My own guess is that instead of providing unbelievers with an opportunity to justify unbelief, this mission will prove that there is life only on this beautiful planet.

We will have to wait and see.